[PATCH 4/7] drm/msm/dpu: drop duplicated intf/wb indices from encoder structs

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On 03/05/2023 02:19, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/2/2023 4:15 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 May 2023 at 02:04, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk at quicinc.com> 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/30/2023 4:57 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> Remove intf_idx and wb_idx fields from struct dpu_encoder_phys and
>>>> struct dpu_enc_phys_init_params. Set the hw_intf and hw_wb directly and
>>>> use them to get the instance index.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>>   From whatever I can see, this will not affect functionality of intf or
>>> wb and cleans it up well , so I am fine with this. Hence,
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk at quicinc.com>
>>>
>>> One minor comment/question.
>>>
>>> <snipped other parts>
>>>
>>>> @@ -761,7 +761,7 @@ struct dpu_encoder_phys *dpu_encoder_phys_cmd_init(
>>>>        struct dpu_encoder_phys_cmd *cmd_enc = NULL;
>>>>        int ret = 0;
>>>>
>>>> -     DPU_DEBUG("intf %d\n", p->intf_idx - INTF_0);
>>>
>>> Was it intentional to drop the index in this log?
>>
>> We don't have p->intf_idx at this point. I think we can use
>> p->hw_intf->idx instead, I'll fix that for v2.
>>
> 
> Yes, I was aware that. In all other logs, intf_idx was replaced with 
> hw_intf->idx except this one. So I was not sure if it was intentional or 
> just removed accidentally.

Most likely it was a leftover from the interim patch where I didn't have 
p->hw_intf. Initially I kept the code which manually set the 
phys->hw_intf (and hw_wb), but then it was just easier to pass that 
through the params and let the caller set it.

> 
>>>
>>>> +     DPU_DEBUG("intf\n");
>>>>
>>>>        cmd_enc = kzalloc(sizeof(*cmd_enc), GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>>
>>

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry