[PATCH v2 14/16] drm/ast: astdp: Look up mode index from table

Jocelyn Falempe jfalempe at redhat.com
Thu Jan 30 11:33:34 UTC 2025


On 29/01/2025 15:05, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
> On 29/01/2025 13:01, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>>
>> Am 29.01.25 um 12:27 schrieb Jocelyn Falempe:
>>> On 29/01/2025 10:55, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>> Replace the large switch statement with a look-up table when selecting
>>>> the mode index. Makes the code easier to read. The table is sorted by
>>>> resolutions; if run-time overhead from traversal becomes significant,
>>>> binary search would be a possible optimization.
>>>>
>>>> The mode index requires a refresh-rate index to be added or subtracted,
>>>> which still requires a minimal switch.
>>>>
>>> I think there is a problem in the mode_index/refresh_index 
>>> calculation, see below:

Sorry, I though I already reviewed it. With the added explanations, it 
looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe at redhat.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de>
>>>> Suggested-by: Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe at redhat.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_dp.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++ 
>>>> +------------------
>>>>   1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ 
>>>> ast_dp.c
>>>> index e1ca012e639be..70fa754432bca 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_dp.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_dp.c
>>>> @@ -14,80 +14,74 @@
>>>>   #include "ast_drv.h"
>>>>   #include "ast_vbios.h"
>>>>   +struct ast_astdp_mode_index_table_entry {
>>>> +    unsigned int hdisplay;
>>>> +    unsigned int vdisplay;
>>>> +    unsigned int mode_index;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +/* FIXME: Do refresh rate and flags actually matter? */
>>>> +static const struct ast_astdp_mode_index_table_entry 
>>>> ast_astdp_mode_index_table[] = {
>>>> +    {  320,  240, ASTDP_320x240_60 },
>>>> +    {  400,  300, ASTDP_400x300_60 },
>>>> +    {  512,  384, ASTDP_512x384_60 },
>>>> +    {  640,  480, ASTDP_640x480_60 },
>>>> +    {  800,  600, ASTDP_800x600_56 },
>>>> +    { 1024,  768, ASTDP_1024x768_60 },
>>>> +    { 1152,  864, ASTDP_1152x864_75 },
>>>> +    { 1280,  800, ASTDP_1280x800_60_RB },
>>>> +    { 1280, 1024, ASTDP_1280x1024_60 },
>>>> +    { 1360,  768, ASTDP_1366x768_60 }, // same as 1366x786
>>>> +    { 1366,  768, ASTDP_1366x768_60 },
>>>> +    { 1440,  900, ASTDP_1440x900_60_RB },
>>>> +    { 1600,  900, ASTDP_1600x900_60_RB },
>>>> +    { 1600, 1200, ASTDP_1600x1200_60 },
>>>> +    { 1680, 1050, ASTDP_1680x1050_60_RB },
>>>> +    { 1920, 1080, ASTDP_1920x1080_60 },
>>>> +    { 1920, 1200, ASTDP_1920x1200_60 },
>>>> +    { 0 }
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +static int __ast_astdp_get_mode_index(unsigned int hdisplay, 
>>>> unsigned int vdisplay)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    const struct ast_astdp_mode_index_table_entry *entry = 
>>>> ast_astdp_mode_index_table;
>>>> +
>>>> +    while (entry->hdisplay && entry->vdisplay) {
>>>> +        if (entry->hdisplay == hdisplay && entry->vdisplay == 
>>>> vdisplay)
>>>> +            return entry->mode_index;
>>>> +        ++entry;
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +    return -EINVAL;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>   static int ast_astdp_get_mode_index(const struct 
>>>> ast_vbios_enhtable *vmode)
>>>>   {
>>>> +    int mode_index;
>>>>       u8 refresh_rate_index;
>>>>   +    mode_index = __ast_astdp_get_mode_index(vmode->hde, vmode->vde);
>>>> +    if (mode_index < 0)
>>>> +        return mode_index;
>>>> +
>>>>       if (vmode->refresh_rate_index < 1 || vmode->refresh_rate_index 
>>>> > 255)
>>>>           return -EINVAL;
>>>> -
>>>>       refresh_rate_index = vmode->refresh_rate_index - 1;
>>>>   -    switch (vmode->hde) {
>>>> -    case 320:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 240)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_320x240_60;
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 400:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 300)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_400x300_60;
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 512:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 384)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_512x384_60;
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 640:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 480)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_640x480_60 + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 800:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 600)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_800x600_56 + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1024:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 768)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1024x768_60 + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1152:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 864)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_1152x864_75;
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1280:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 800)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1280x800_60_RB - 
>>>> (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 1024)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1280x1024_60 + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1360:
>>>> -    case 1366:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 768)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_1366x768_60;
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1440:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 900)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1440x900_60_RB - 
>>>> (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1600:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 900)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1600x900_60_RB - 
>>>> (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 1200)
>>>
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1680:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 1050)
>>>> -            return (u8)(ASTDP_1680x1050_60_RB - 
>>>> (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>> -        break;
>>>> -    case 1920:
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 1080)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_1920x1080_60;
>>>> -        if (vmode->vde == 1200)
>>>> -            return ASTDP_1920x1200_60;
>>>> +    /* FIXME: Why are we doing this? */
>>>> +    switch (mode_index) {
>>>> +    case ASTDP_1280x800_60_RB:
>>>> +    case ASTDP_1440x900_60_RB:
>>>> +    case ASTDP_1600x900_60_RB:
>>>> +    case ASTDP_1680x1050_60_RB:
>>>> +        mode_index = (u8)(mode_index - (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>>           break;
>>> I think you should add this to do the same as before:
>>
>> It's intentional. The refresh-rate index stored in vmode- 
>>  >refresh_rate_index is at least one. The function then subtracts 1 to 
>> compute refresh_rate_index, so we have 0 by default. And that's what 
>> we always used for cases that did not explicitly add 
>> refresh_rate_index before. I guess I should add this to the commit 
>> message's second paragraph.
>>
>> Apart from that, I honestly don't understand the purpose of this 
>> computation.
> 
> Yes, I have no clue either. Thanks for the clarification.> Best regards
>> Thomas
>>
>>>
>>>     case ASTDP_640x480_60:
>>>     case ASTDP_800x600_56:
>>>     case ASTDP_1024x768_60:
>>>     case ASTDP_1280x1024_60:
>>>         mode_index = (u8)(mode_index + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>           break;
>>>     default:
>>>         break;
>>>
>>>>       default:
>>>> +        mode_index = (u8)(mode_index + (u8)refresh_rate_index);
>>>>           break;
>>>>       }
>>>>   -    return -EINVAL;
>>>> +    return mode_index;
>>>>   }
>>>>     static bool ast_astdp_is_connected(struct ast_device *ast)
>>>
>>
> 



More information about the dri-devel mailing list