[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/13] drm/i915: Hide the source vs. sink rate handling from intel_dp_compute_config()

[sonika]

On Friday 13 March 2015 05:32 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:14:59PM +0530, sonika wrote:
>> On Thursday 12 March 2015 08:40 PM, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com wrote:
>>> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>> intel_dp_compute_config() only really needs to know the rates supported
>>> by both source and sink, so hide the raw source and sink arrays from it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>>    1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> index 61538f4..a88f932 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> @@ -1192,9 +1192,9 @@ intel_dp_set_clock(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
>>>    	}
>>>    }
>>>    
>>> -static int intel_supported_rates(const int *source_rates, int source_len,
>>> -				 const int *sink_rates, int sink_len,
>>> -				 int *supported_rates)
>>> +static int intersect_rates(const int *source_rates, int source_len,
>>> +			   const int *sink_rates, int sink_len,
>>> +			   int *supported_rates)
>>>    {
>>>    	int i = 0, j = 0, k = 0;
>>>    
>>> @@ -1213,6 +1213,21 @@ static int intel_supported_rates(const int *source_rates, int source_len,
>>>    	return k;
>>>    }
>>>    
>>> +static int intel_supported_rates(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>>> +				 int *supported_rates)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
>>> +	const int *source_rates, *sink_rates;
>>> +	int source_len, sink_len;
>>> +
>>> +	sink_len = intel_dp_sink_rates(intel_dp, &sink_rates);
>>> +	source_len = intel_dp_source_rates(dev, &source_rates);
>>> +
>>> +	return intersect_rates(source_rates, source_len,
>>> +			       sink_rates, sink_len,
>>> +			       supported_rates);
>>> +}
>>> +
>> Now when I am looking at it, the name "supported_rates", sounds
>> confusing. Because first we are using it for sink_rates in
>> intel_dp->supported_rates
>> and then we use it to store the intersect_rates. Since sink_rates are
>> termed supported_rates in the spec, can we remove the sink_rates altogether
>> and have source_rates, sink_supported_rates and common_rates (or
>> something else ?)
> Hmm. Yeah. Maybe just rename to intel_dp->sink_rates? And common_rates
> would seem like a decent name for the intersection.
Sounds good.
>> -Sonika
>>>    static int rate_to_index(int find, const int *rates)
>>>    {
>>>    	int i = 0;
>>> @@ -1243,17 +1258,10 @@ intel_dp_compute_config(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
>>>    	int max_clock;
>>>    	int bpp, mode_rate;
>>>    	int link_avail, link_clock;
>>> -	const int *sink_rates;
>>> -	int supported_rates[8] = {0};
>>> -	const int *source_rates;
>>> -	int source_len, sink_len, supported_len;
>>> -
>>> -	sink_len = intel_dp_sink_rates(intel_dp, &sink_rates);
>>> -
>>> -	source_len = intel_dp_source_rates(dev, &source_rates);
>>> +	int supported_rates[DP_MAX_SUPPORTED_RATES] = {};
>>> +	int supported_len;
>>>    
>>> -	supported_len = intel_supported_rates(source_rates, source_len,
>>> -				sink_rates, sink_len, supported_rates);
>>> +	supported_len = intel_supported_rates(intel_dp, supported_rates);
>>>    
>>>    	/* No common link rates between source and sink */
>>>    	WARN_ON(supported_len <= 0);
>>> @@ -1352,7 +1360,8 @@ found:
>>>    
>>>    	if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9 && intel_dp->supported_rates[0]) {
>>>    		intel_dp->rate_select =
>>> -			rate_to_index(supported_rates[clock], sink_rates);
>>> +			rate_to_index(supported_rates[clock],
>>> +				      intel_dp->supported_rates);
>>>    		intel_dp->link_bw = 0;
>>>    	}
>>>