From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fllvem-ot04.ext.ti.com (fllvem-ot04.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.246]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E00D31DDC2C; Mon, 5 May 2025 07:50:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.19.246 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746431419; cv=none; b=YXOsecre7BChYZ9XzyimSNFwRSbHMLVvuHeZ1wI8pcxX3ABfj/ndG+VLHkW4wG5CbfRK1webiZin2+VfU1ruKM0rVReOa0WRcHIE7kbKnUJQzfp+8wYYihGSSYT5yfBWDmqc5/mdbCCNJliHRWmtE4RWecvMIZAV9JHGnqpGjNA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746431419; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8ctXOMeS1LPtoldoIrh31Q77Yd6gwu6HLyjZWl8gxo0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=GFEj3ewi6JnvAFPPwtyDLoFTQVMUlMQCsNaWr+za4nRLMJy00OdAD/lpM+MlWam2PwBN9LUqcEztjxM6iOLihIBPDsd2VxzoPGUp4JPoApxG7GyEQ5CqZSc0c/Fl5JVD2l+Mj6N4vhE5vPnJadducC8wG3L7D9TGEC9P/RrQ5Xo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b=t5NOcc4A; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.19.246 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="t5NOcc4A" Received: from fllv0034.itg.ti.com ([10.64.40.246]) by fllvem-ot04.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 5457nOll716797 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 5 May 2025 02:49:24 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1746431364; bh=5Ii9h9rPzROGPRkouzthetaV+45FxhY90QOk8t0nqok=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=t5NOcc4AkykTBetmD815dXZgKQT6FypKLSXNv8PzRCUkpEQBeB2ShPwrsvLWs0Iro ArOJwiKxnKdxee9m6P3/eQZ/CAKe3YZPpTf8KAIQsVgK/KSXw9vlanZoPsb1lMxsWX imw5Ni2+NvFoTfmjVFJ+mYL/53paBSoQD6oQj/64= Received: from DLEE115.ent.ti.com (dlee115.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.26]) by fllv0034.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 5457nOBi019555 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 May 2025 02:49:24 -0500 Received: from DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) by DLEE115.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Mon, 5 May 2025 02:49:23 -0500 Received: from lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.250) by DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 5 May 2025 02:49:23 -0500 Received: from [172.24.227.193] (devarsh-precision-tower-3620.dhcp.ti.com [172.24.227.193]) by lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 5457nHUY087427; Mon, 5 May 2025 02:49:18 -0500 Message-ID: <5fd14448-27d9-43e6-8526-fd93483b94cb@ti.com> Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 13:19:17 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Betterbird (Linux) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] drm/tidss: Update infrastructure to support K3 DSS cut-down versions To: Tomi Valkeinen CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20250429143656.3252877-1-devarsht@ti.com> <20250429143656.3252877-3-devarsht@ti.com> <1f8c43cd-8c26-4e42-b144-b91f5ffc2e2e@ti.com> <88993439-bfdc-418c-95c6-d6d8bdb5b87f@ideasonboard.com> <466254e9-145f-4839-9451-a5f282ff02e9@ti.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Devarsh Thakkar In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-C2ProcessedOrg: 333ef613-75bf-4e12-a4b1-8e3623f5dcea Hi Tomi On 03/05/25 14:14, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 02/05/2025 14:52, Devarsh Thakkar wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> Ok I see what you mean to say.....although functionally it is working >> fine but from readability point of view it is confusing since both >> functions use same argument name i.e hw_plane in two different contexts. >> In that case, I would propose to use hw_id as arg name for all >> dispc_k3_vid* functions, will that be okay ? > > I'd prefer to have all the dispc functions take the same kind of index. > Why? Even all dispc functions are not named with same prefix. 1) dispc_vid* functions act on VID* base directly and here plane indexing would be w.r.t which VID* base we are using e.g VID vs VIDL 2) dispc_k3_vid* functions act on common region bits which are related to VID pipelines and plane indexing would signify vid base w.r.t common register space i.e. COMMON_VID_IRQ0 vs COMMON_VID_IRQ1. As they both act on different register base and refer it in different contexts (VID* base vs COMMON_VID* base) and have also been named differently anyway, I feel it is okay and legitimate to use hw_id for dispc_k3_vid* functions (which would signify vid* indexing w.r.t common region) and hw_plane for dispc_vid* functions (which would signify vid* base w.r.t VID* regions mapped in device-tree). Regards Devarsh >  Tomi >