| Message ID | 1479917907-2468-2-git-send-email-animesh.manna@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48:23PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: > Guid is changed for bxt platform, so corrected the guid for bxt. > > v1: Initial version as RFC. > > v2: Based on review comment from Jani and David, > have kept guid as binary format. > > Signed-off-by: Ananth Krishna R <ananth.krishna.r@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Bharath K Veera <bharath.k.veera@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > old mode 100644 > new mode 100755 3 people handled this patch and none complained about making intel_acpi.c executable? What does happen when you try to execute it? > index eb638a1..8c878ab > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ > acpi_handle dhandle; > } intel_dsm_priv; > > -static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { > +static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { Why drop the const? > 0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e, > 0xd0, 0xc2, > 0x4f, 0x4e, > @@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ > 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c > }; > > +static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = { Missing const. > + 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e, > + 0x1d, 0xeb, > + 0x60, 0x42, > + 0x9d, 0x15, > + 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14 > +}; > + > static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id) > { > switch (id) { > @@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) > static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) > { > acpi_handle dhandle; > + struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; dev == dev_priv, just a rose by another name. Use to_i915(); > + u8 *guid; Missing const. > > dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); > if (!dhandle) > return false; > > - if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, > + if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) > + guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt; > + else > + guid = intel_dsm_guid; > + > + if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, > 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); > return false; > -- > 1.9.1 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On 11/23/2016 10:02 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48:23PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: >> Guid is changed for bxt platform, so corrected the guid for bxt. >> >> v1: Initial version as RFC. >> >> v2: Based on review comment from Jani and David, >> have kept guid as binary format. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ananth Krishna R <ananth.krishna.r@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Bharath K Veera <bharath.k.veera@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >> old mode 100644 >> new mode 100755 > 3 people handled this patch and none complained about making > intel_acpi.c executable? What does happen when you try to execute it? oh, will correct it in the next patchset. > >> index eb638a1..8c878ab >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ >> acpi_handle dhandle; >> } intel_dsm_priv; >> >> -static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { >> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { > Why drop the const? intel_dsm_guid is not updated anywhere, it used to assign it to a common pointer based on platform check in my current implementation. we can explicitly typecast to avoid compilation warning to a normal pointer which will be used during dsm probe. Hope it will be fine. Please let me know for any concern/suggestion. > >> 0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e, >> 0xd0, 0xc2, >> 0x4f, 0x4e, >> @@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ >> 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c >> }; >> >> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = { > Missing const. Explained above. > >> + 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e, >> + 0x1d, 0xeb, >> + 0x60, 0x42, >> + 0x9d, 0x15, >> + 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14 >> +}; >> + >> static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id) >> { >> switch (id) { >> @@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) >> static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) >> { >> acpi_handle dhandle; >> + struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; > dev == dev_priv, just a rose by another name. Use to_i915(); > >> + u8 *guid; > Missing const. Explained above. > >> >> dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); >> if (!dhandle) >> return false; >> >> - if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >> + if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) >> + guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt; >> + else >> + guid = intel_dsm_guid; >> + >> + if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >> 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { >> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); >> return false; >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Intel-gfx mailing list >> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Mon, 28 Nov 2016, Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> wrote: > On 11/23/2016 10:02 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48:23PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: >>> Guid is changed for bxt platform, so corrected the guid for bxt. >>> >>> v1: Initial version as RFC. >>> >>> v2: Based on review comment from Jani and David, >>> have kept guid as binary format. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ananth Krishna R <ananth.krishna.r@intel.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Bharath K Veera <bharath.k.veera@intel.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>> old mode 100644 >>> new mode 100755 >> 3 people handled this patch and none complained about making >> intel_acpi.c executable? What does happen when you try to execute it? > oh, will correct it in the next patchset. >> >>> index eb638a1..8c878ab >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ >>> acpi_handle dhandle; >>> } intel_dsm_priv; >>> >>> -static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { >>> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { >> Why drop the const? > intel_dsm_guid is not updated anywhere, it used to assign it to a common > pointer based on platform check in my current implementation. > we can explicitly typecast to avoid compilation warning to a normal > pointer which will be used during dsm probe. Hope it will be fine. > Please let me know for any concern/suggestion. Doh, you use 'const u8 *guid', of course. The acpi_check_dsm uuid parameter is also const u8 *. BR, Jani. > >> >>> 0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e, >>> 0xd0, 0xc2, >>> 0x4f, 0x4e, >>> @@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ >>> 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c >>> }; >>> >>> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = { >> Missing const. > Explained above. >> >>> + 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e, >>> + 0x1d, 0xeb, >>> + 0x60, 0x42, >>> + 0x9d, 0x15, >>> + 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14 >>> +}; >>> + >>> static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id) >>> { >>> switch (id) { >>> @@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) >>> static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) >>> { >>> acpi_handle dhandle; >>> + struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); >>> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; >> dev == dev_priv, just a rose by another name. Use to_i915(); >> >>> + u8 *guid; >> Missing const. > Explained above. >> >>> >>> dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); >>> if (!dhandle) >>> return false; >>> >>> - if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >>> + if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) >>> + guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt; >>> + else >>> + guid = intel_dsm_guid; >>> + >>> + if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >>> 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { >>> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); >>> return false; >>> -- >>> 1.9.1 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Intel-gfx mailing list >>> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On 11/28/2016 4:54 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2016, Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> wrote: >> On 11/23/2016 10:02 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48:23PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote: >>>> Guid is changed for bxt platform, so corrected the guid for bxt. >>>> >>>> v1: Initial version as RFC. >>>> >>>> v2: Based on review comment from Jani and David, >>>> have kept guid as binary format. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ananth Krishna R <ananth.krishna.r@intel.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bharath K Veera <bharath.k.veera@intel.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>>> old mode 100644 >>>> new mode 100755 >>> 3 people handled this patch and none complained about making >>> intel_acpi.c executable? What does happen when you try to execute it? >> oh, will correct it in the next patchset. >>>> index eb638a1..8c878ab >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c >>>> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ >>>> acpi_handle dhandle; >>>> } intel_dsm_priv; >>>> >>>> -static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { >>>> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { >>> Why drop the const? >> intel_dsm_guid is not updated anywhere, it used to assign it to a common >> pointer based on platform check in my current implementation. >> we can explicitly typecast to avoid compilation warning to a normal >> pointer which will be used during dsm probe. Hope it will be fine. >> Please let me know for any concern/suggestion. > Doh, you use 'const u8 *guid', of course. The acpi_check_dsm uuid > parameter is also const u8 *. > > BR, > Jani. Ok. > >>>> 0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e, >>>> 0xd0, 0xc2, >>>> 0x4f, 0x4e, >>>> @@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ >>>> 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c >>>> }; >>>> >>>> +static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = { >>> Missing const. >> Explained above. >>>> + 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e, >>>> + 0x1d, 0xeb, >>>> + 0x60, 0x42, >>>> + 0x9d, 0x15, >>>> + 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14 >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id) >>>> { >>>> switch (id) { >>>> @@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) >>>> static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) >>>> { >>>> acpi_handle dhandle; >>>> + struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); >>>> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; >>> dev == dev_priv, just a rose by another name. Use to_i915(); >>> >>>> + u8 *guid; >>> Missing const. >> Explained above. >>>> >>>> dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); >>>> if (!dhandle) >>>> return false; >>>> >>>> - if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >>>> + if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) >>>> + guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt; >>>> + else >>>> + guid = intel_dsm_guid; >>>> + >>>> + if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, >>>> 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { >>>> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); >>>> return false; >>>> -- >>>> 1.9.1 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Intel-gfx mailing list >>>> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx >> _______________________________________________ >> Intel-gfx mailing list >> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c old mode 100644 new mode 100755 index eb638a1..8c878ab --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ acpi_handle dhandle; } intel_dsm_priv; -static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { +static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = { 0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e, 0xd0, 0xc2, 0x4f, 0x4e, @@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c }; +static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = { + 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e, + 0x1d, 0xeb, + 0x60, 0x42, + 0x9d, 0x15, + 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14 +}; + static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id) { switch (id) { @@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) { acpi_handle dhandle; + struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev); + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; + u8 *guid; dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); if (!dhandle) return false; - if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, + if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) + guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt; + else + guid = intel_dsm_guid; + + if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); return false;