[PATCH] drm/i915/bios: Update new entries in VBT BDB block definations

[Bhadane, Dnyaneshwar]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 7:58 PM
> To: Bhadane, Dnyaneshwar <dnyaneshwar.bhadane at intel.com>; intel-
> gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Bhadane, Dnyaneshwar <dnyaneshwar.bhadane at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/bios: Update new entries in VBT BDB block
> definations
> 
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024, Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
> <dnyaneshwar.bhadane at intel.com> wrote:
> > New entries updated in BDB defination from VBT v257- v260.
> 
> *definition
> 
> Please explain what you're adding.

Thank you, Jani for the feedback, 

I will address all the suggestion above and below in the next revision.
> 
> Also, the spec never ceases to amaze me. Like here, adding stuff for a few
> revisions, obsoleting and starting over. Ugh.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Dnyaneshwar Bhadane <dnyaneshwar.bhadane at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h | 35
> > ++++++++++++++++---
> >  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h
> > index e613288937e4..65342f347bba 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h
> > @@ -1080,6 +1080,8 @@ struct bdb_edp {
> >  	u16 edp_fast_link_training_rate[16];			/* 224+ */
> >  	u16 edp_max_port_link_rate[16];				/*
> 244+ */
> >  	u16 edp_dsc_disable;					/* 251+ */
> > +	u16 t16_delay;						/* 260+ */
> 
> Please let's follow the spec in member naming where feasible.
Noted, Thanks.
> 
> This would be t6_delay_support.
> 
> > +	u16 t16_link_idle_time;					/* 260+ */
> 
> And this would be u16 link_idle_time[16]. The size is 32 bytes, not 2.

Noted, I missed to add as an array of [16]. Thank you.

> 
> (Where does t16 come from?)
Noted,  Renaming needed. 
> 
> >  } __packed;
> >
> >  /*
> > @@ -1330,12 +1332,27 @@ struct aggressiveness_profile2_entry {
> >  	u8 elp_aggressiveness : 4;
> >  } __packed;
> >
> > +struct aggressiveness_profile3_entry {
> > +	u8 adp_aggressiveness:4;
> 
> apd_aggressiveness
> 
> > +	u8 po_aggressiveness:4;
> 
> pixoptix_aggressiveness
Noted. Thank you.
> 
> > +} __packed;
> > +
> > +struct aggressiveness_profile4_entry {
> > +	u8 xpst_aggressiveness:4;
> > +	u8 tcon_aggressiveness:4;
> > +} __packed;
> > +
> > +struct panel_identification {
> > +	u8 panel_type:4;
> 
> panel_type is a loaded word in VBT. Let's avoid it. Maybe panel_technology or
> something.
Noted. Thank you.
> 
> > +	u8 reserved:4;
> > +} __packed;
> > +
> >  struct bdb_lfp_power {
> >  	struct lfp_power_features features;				/*
> ???-227 */
> >  	struct als_data_entry als[5];
> >  	u8 lace_aggressiveness_profile:3;				/*
> 210-227 */
> >  	u8 reserved1:5;
> > -	u16 dpst;							/*
> 228+ */
> > +	u16 dpst;							/*
> 228-256 */
> >  	u16 psr;							/* 228+ */
> >  	u16 drrs;							/*
> 228+ */
> >  	u16 lace_support;						/*
> 228+ */
> > @@ -1343,12 +1360,20 @@ struct bdb_lfp_power {
> >  	u16 dmrrs;							/*
> 228+ */
> >  	u16 adb;							/*
> 228+ */
> >  	u16 lace_enabled_status;					/*
> 228+ */
> > -	struct aggressiveness_profile_entry aggressiveness[16];		/*
> 228+ */
> > +	struct aggressiveness_profile_entry aggressiveness[16];		/*
> 228-256 */
> 
> The LACE agressiveness is still valid. Please add the comment to struct
> aggressiveness_profile dpst_aggressiveness member.
Noted. Thank you.
> 
> >  	u16 hobl;							/*
> 232+ */
> >  	u16 vrr_feature_enabled;					/*
> 233+ */
> > -	u16 elp;							/* 247+ */
> > -	u16 opst;							/*
> 247+ */
> > -	struct aggressiveness_profile2_entry aggressiveness2[16];	/*
> 247+ */
> > +	u16 elp;							/* 247-256 */
> > +	u16 opst;							/*
> 247-256 */
> > +	struct aggressiveness_profile2_entry aggressiveness2[16];	/*
> 247-256 */
> > +	u16 adp;							/*
> 253-256 */
> 
> apd
> 
> > +	u16 po;								/*
> 253-256 */
> 
> pixoptix
> 
> > +	struct aggressiveness_profile3_entry aggressiveness3[16];	/*
> 253-256 */
> > +	struct panel_identification panel_identity[16];			/*
> 257+ */
> 
> panel_identification
Noted. Thank you.
> 
> > +	u16 xpst;							/*
> 257+ */
> 
> xpst_support
> 
> > +	u16 tcon;							/*
> 257+ */
> 
> tcon_based_backlight_optimization
> 
> > +	struct aggressiveness_profile4_entry aggressiveness4[16];	/*
> 257+ */
> > +	u16 tcon_coexist_xpst;						/*
> 257+ */
> 
> Hrmh, this is where the member naming in spec is not feasible. Maybe
> tcon_xpst_coexistence.
Renaming needed. Noted. Thank you.

Dnyaneshwar

> 
> >  } __packed;
> >
> >  /*
> 
> --
> Jani Nikula, Intel