[PATCH] drm/msm/dpu: sort entries in the HW catalog

[Marijn Suijten]

On 2023-01-09 20:30:01, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
<snip>
> The usual problem is that there are two dimensions: with each 
> generations there are new (and removed) features, but on the other hand 
> within each generation there are units that are feature-rich and the 
> ones that are feature-deprived. qcm2290, sm6115, etc.

Yes, in that case (as we currently already do) have to duplicate an
existing struct and give one of the two a new feature bit.

> >>>> Thus SDM comes before SC and SM
> >>>> platforms and QCM is kept as the last one. There are no functional
> >>>> changes in this patch.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, I hate such mass-moves too. However the entries in this file are
> >>>> slowly becoming uncontrollable. Let's enforce some order now (while it's
> >>>> late already, but not _that_ late).
> >>>
> >>> I agree that something should happen, contributing to this file is
> >>> unnecessarily tough.
> >>
> >> In the IRC conversation Rob suggested playing with includes, but I
> >> don't see a good way to implement that.
> > 
> > That would be nice; especially if we accept struct duplication (instead
> > of recursively including "earlier" versions where needed, as mentioned
> > in IRC that'll spiral out of control).  With that one can easily diff
> > two include files and understand the differences between SoCs and/or DPU
> > hardware revisions (or notice whether a certain configuration might be
> > missing/extraneous).
> 
> Let's see what kind of binary growth does it bring. In the end it well 
> might be that the compiler is smart enough.

Curious as well, it might overlap identical structs (identical byte
sequence) similar to string interning?

- Marijn