Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <dc937077-91bd-8c4f-b220-82df11efd215@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 7 Jul 2023 05:19:57 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] drm/msm/dpu: Refactor printing of main blocks in
 device core dump
Content-Language: en-GB
To:     Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>,
        Ryan McCann <quic_rmccann@quicinc.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>, Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
        Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc:     Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com
References: <20230622-devcoredump_patch-v4-0-e304ddbe9648@quicinc.com>
 <20230622-devcoredump_patch-v4-5-e304ddbe9648@quicinc.com>
 <deb38d54-bf7f-f42a-8b61-f6c8f46370b0@linaro.org>
 <da04a824-b44c-d6a0-3dfc-f1b8e8272195@quicinc.com>
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <da04a824-b44c-d6a0-3dfc-f1b8e8272195@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 07/07/2023 03:16, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/6/2023 5:07 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 06/07/2023 23:48, Ryan McCann wrote:
>>> Currently, the names of main blocks are hardcoded into the
>>> msm_disp_snapshot_add_block function rather than using the name that
>>> already exists in the catalog. Change this to take the name directly 
>>> from
>>> the catalog instead of hardcoding it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ryan McCann <quic_rmccann@quicinc.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c | 32 
>>> ++++++++++++++++----------------
>>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c 
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
>>> index aa8499de1b9f..70dbb1204e6c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
>>> @@ -899,38 +899,38 @@ static void dpu_kms_mdp_snapshot(struct 
>>> msm_disp_state *disp_state, struct msm_k
>>>       /* dump CTL sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->ctl_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->ctl[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->ctl[i].base, "ctl_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->ctl[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->ctl[i].base, cat->ctl[i].name);
>>
>> Splitting on the `+' sign is a bad idea. It makes it harder to read 
>> the code. Please keep the first line as is, it is perfectly fine on 
>> its own, and do just what you have stated in the commit message: 
>> change printed block name.
>>
> 
> Actually, I asked Ryan to fix the indent here in the same patch as he 
> was touching this code anyway.
> 
> So you would prefer thats left untouched?

Yes. The current one was definitely better than splitting in the middle 
of a statement.

> 
>>>       /* dump DSPP sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->dspp_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->dspp[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->dspp[i].base, "dspp_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->dspp[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->dspp[i].base, cat->dspp[i].name);
>>>       /* dump INTF sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->intf_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->intf[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->intf[i].base, "intf_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->intf[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->intf[i].base, cat->intf[i].name);
>>>       /* dump PP sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->pingpong_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->pingpong[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->pingpong[i].base, 
>>> "pingpong_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, 
>>> cat->pingpong[i].len, dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->pingpong[i].base, cat->pingpong[i].name);
>>>       /* dump SSPP sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->sspp_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->sspp[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->sspp[i].base, "sspp_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->sspp[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->sspp[i].base, cat->sspp[i].name);
>>>       /* dump LM sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->mixer_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->mixer[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->mixer[i].base, "lm_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->mixer[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->mixer[i].base, cat->mixer[i].name);
>>>       /* dump WB sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->wb_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->wb[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->wb[i].base, "wb_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->wb[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->wb[i].base, cat->wb[i].name);
>>>       if (cat->mdp[0].features & BIT(DPU_MDP_PERIPH_0_REMOVED)) {
>>>           msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, MDP_PERIPH_TOP0,
>>> @@ -944,8 +944,8 @@ static void dpu_kms_mdp_snapshot(struct 
>>> msm_disp_state *disp_state, struct msm_k
>>>       /* dump DSC sub-blocks HW regs info */
>>>       for (i = 0; i < cat->dsc_count; i++)
>>> -        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->dsc[i].len,
>>> -                dpu_kms->mmio + cat->dsc[i].base, "dsc_%d", i);
>>> +        msm_disp_snapshot_add_block(disp_state, cat->dsc[i].len, 
>>> dpu_kms->mmio +
>>> +                        cat->dsc[i].base, cat->dsc[i].name);
>>>       pm_runtime_put_sync(&dpu_kms->pdev->dev);
>>>   }
>>>
>>

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry