[v3,3/4] drm/edid: Throw away the dummy VIC 0 cea mode
diff mbox series

Message ID 20190925135502.24055-4-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • drm/edid: Add new modes from CTA-861-G
Related show

Commit Message

Ville Syrjälä Sept. 25, 2019, 1:55 p.m. UTC
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

Now that the cea mode handling is not 100% tied to the single
array the dummy VIC 0 mode is pretty much pointles. Throw it
out.

Cc: Hans Verkuil <hansverk@cisco.com>
Cc: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 14 +++++---------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

Comments

Sharma, Shashank Oct. 3, 2019, 8:29 a.m. UTC | #1
On 9/25/2019 7:25 PM, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> Now that the cea mode handling is not 100% tied to the single
> array the dummy VIC 0 mode is pretty much pointles. Throw it
> out.
>
> Cc: Hans Verkuil <hansverk@cisco.com>
> Cc: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 14 +++++---------
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> index 9f6996323efa..0007004d3221 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> @@ -709,11 +709,9 @@ static const struct minimode extra_modes[] = {
>   /*
>    * From CEA/CTA-861 spec.
>    *
> - * Index with VIC.
> + * Index with VIC-1.

Do we want to really do this ? Till now, due to dummy VIC, indexing was 
pretty direct as per VIC, which was making the code easy to read and 
understand. I would still think that keeping the dummy VIC and adjusting 
the size of cea_modes_0[] in the size function, would be something 
neater to do, do you think so ?

- Shashank

>    */
> -static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_0[] = {
> -	/* 0 - dummy, VICs start at 1 */
> -	{ },
> +static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_1[] = {
>   	/* 1 - 640x480@60Hz 4:3 */
>   	{ DRM_MODE("640x480", DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER, 25175, 640, 656,
>   		   752, 800, 0, 480, 490, 492, 525, 0,
> @@ -3211,10 +3209,8 @@ static u8 *drm_find_cea_extension(const struct edid *edid)
>   
>   static const struct drm_display_mode *cea_mode_for_vic(u8 vic)
>   {
> -	if (!vic)
> -		return NULL;
> -	if (vic < ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> -		return &edid_cea_modes_0[vic];
> +	if (vic >= 1 && vic < 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
> +		return &edid_cea_modes_1[vic - 1];
>   	if (vic >= 193 && vic < 193 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_193))
>   		return &edid_cea_modes_193[vic - 193];
>   	return NULL;
> @@ -3227,7 +3223,7 @@ static u8 cea_num_vics(void)
>   
>   static u8 cea_next_vic(u8 vic)
>   {
> -	if (++vic == ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> +	if (++vic == 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
>   		vic = 193;
>   	return vic;
>   }
Ville Syrjälä Oct. 3, 2019, 2:16 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 01:59:42PM +0530, Sharma, Shashank wrote:
> 
> On 9/25/2019 7:25 PM, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > Now that the cea mode handling is not 100% tied to the single
> > array the dummy VIC 0 mode is pretty much pointles. Throw it
> > out.
> >
> > Cc: Hans Verkuil <hansverk@cisco.com>
> > Cc: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 14 +++++---------
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > index 9f6996323efa..0007004d3221 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > @@ -709,11 +709,9 @@ static const struct minimode extra_modes[] = {
> >   /*
> >    * From CEA/CTA-861 spec.
> >    *
> > - * Index with VIC.
> > + * Index with VIC-1.
> 
> Do we want to really do this ? Till now, due to dummy VIC, indexing was 
> pretty direct as per VIC, which was making the code easy to read and 
> understand. I would still think that keeping the dummy VIC and adjusting 
> the size of cea_modes_0[] in the size function, would be something 
> neater to do, do you think so ?

I don't see the point of wasting that space. The access is now fully
abstraced so you *never* index this directly.

> 
> - Shashank
> 
> >    */
> > -static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_0[] = {
> > -	/* 0 - dummy, VICs start at 1 */
> > -	{ },
> > +static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_1[] = {
> >   	/* 1 - 640x480@60Hz 4:3 */
> >   	{ DRM_MODE("640x480", DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER, 25175, 640, 656,
> >   		   752, 800, 0, 480, 490, 492, 525, 0,
> > @@ -3211,10 +3209,8 @@ static u8 *drm_find_cea_extension(const struct edid *edid)
> >   
> >   static const struct drm_display_mode *cea_mode_for_vic(u8 vic)
> >   {
> > -	if (!vic)
> > -		return NULL;
> > -	if (vic < ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> > -		return &edid_cea_modes_0[vic];
> > +	if (vic >= 1 && vic < 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
> > +		return &edid_cea_modes_1[vic - 1];
> >   	if (vic >= 193 && vic < 193 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_193))
> >   		return &edid_cea_modes_193[vic - 193];
> >   	return NULL;
> > @@ -3227,7 +3223,7 @@ static u8 cea_num_vics(void)
> >   
> >   static u8 cea_next_vic(u8 vic)
> >   {
> > -	if (++vic == ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> > +	if (++vic == 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
> >   		vic = 193;
> >   	return vic;
> >   }

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
index 9f6996323efa..0007004d3221 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
@@ -709,11 +709,9 @@  static const struct minimode extra_modes[] = {
 /*
  * From CEA/CTA-861 spec.
  *
- * Index with VIC.
+ * Index with VIC-1.
  */
-static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_0[] = {
-	/* 0 - dummy, VICs start at 1 */
-	{ },
+static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_1[] = {
 	/* 1 - 640x480@60Hz 4:3 */
 	{ DRM_MODE("640x480", DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER, 25175, 640, 656,
 		   752, 800, 0, 480, 490, 492, 525, 0,
@@ -3211,10 +3209,8 @@  static u8 *drm_find_cea_extension(const struct edid *edid)
 
 static const struct drm_display_mode *cea_mode_for_vic(u8 vic)
 {
-	if (!vic)
-		return NULL;
-	if (vic < ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
-		return &edid_cea_modes_0[vic];
+	if (vic >= 1 && vic < 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
+		return &edid_cea_modes_1[vic - 1];
 	if (vic >= 193 && vic < 193 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_193))
 		return &edid_cea_modes_193[vic - 193];
 	return NULL;
@@ -3227,7 +3223,7 @@  static u8 cea_num_vics(void)
 
 static u8 cea_next_vic(u8 vic)
 {
-	if (++vic == ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
+	if (++vic == 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
 		vic = 193;
 	return vic;
 }