[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/adl-n: Differentiate ADLP and ADLN steppings

[Souza, Jose]

On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 16:28 +0530, Tejas Upadhyay wrote:
> ADL-N and ADL-P stepping are different, thus we
> need to add check for ADL-N in IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejas Upadhyay <tejaskumarx.surendrakumar.upadhyay at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index 9274417cd87a..51f2a14b0dca 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -1167,7 +1167,7 @@ IS_SUBPLATFORM(const struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  	 IS_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until))
>  
>  #define IS_ADLP_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until) \
> -	(IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && \
> +	(IS_ALDERLAKE_P(__i915) && !IS_ADLP_N(__i915) &&\
>  	 IS_DISPLAY_STEP(__i915, since, until))

Where is the ADLN_DISPLAY_STEP checks then?

My understanding it that ADLN is ADLS GT + ADLP display, so this looks wrong.

Also RPL is already a derivated platform of ADL, so RPL has subplatform bit 0 and and INTEL_SUBPLATFORM_N is using the same bit so alderlake-N will
use the same code paths as RPL what is again wrong.

>  
>  #define IS_ADLP_GRAPHICS_STEP(__i915, since, until) \