Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] drm/msm/dpu: Document and enable TEAR interrupts on DSI interfaces

[Marijn Suijten]

On 2023-01-01 15:12:35, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 31/12/2022 23:50, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > <snip>
> > -#define INTF_BLK(_name, _id, _base, _type, _ctrl_id, _progfetch, _features, _reg, _underrun_bit, _vsync_bit) \
> > +#define INTF_BLK(_name, _id, _base, _len, _type, _ctrl_id, _progfetch, _features, _reg, _underrun_bit, _vsync_bit, _tear_reg, _tear_rd_ptr_bit) \
> >   	{\
> >   	.name = _name, .id = _id, \
> > -	.base = _base, .len = 0x280, \
> > +	.base = _base, .len = _len, \
> 
> Please move .len setting to a separate patch, it is not direclty related 
> to tear interrupt addition.

It is directly related in that the TE registers reside in the extra
space beyond 0x280, but I can surely make that explicit in a separate
patch.

> >   	.features = _features, \
> >   	.type = _type, \
> >   	.controller_id = _ctrl_id, \
> >   	.prog_fetch_lines_worst_case = _progfetch, \
> >   	.intr_underrun = DPU_IRQ_IDX(_reg, _underrun_bit), \
> >   	.intr_vsync = DPU_IRQ_IDX(_reg, _vsync_bit), \
> > +	.intr_tear_rd_ptr = DPU_IRQ_IDX(_tear_reg, _tear_rd_ptr_bit), \
> 
> Initially I added separate _reg and _bit settings because reg was common 
> to both interrupts. However now as tear interrups use different reg it 
> might be better to first move DPU_IRQ_IDX out of this macro () and then 
> to add your tear_rd_ptr_intr as a single intr_idx.

I assumed as much; then we do get the duplication of _reg but I guess
it's not too bad if the lines are nicely wrapped like in _pp[].  I'll do
so in a separate patch.

- Marijn

<snip>