mbox series

[0/4] drm/msm/dpu: clearly document INTF_DP vs INTF_EDP difference

Message ID 20220222062246.242577-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org
Headers show
Series drm/msm/dpu: clearly document INTF_DP vs INTF_EDP difference | expand

Message

Dmitry Baryshkov Feb. 22, 2022, 6:22 a.m. UTC 
Recent dicussion on the mailing list [1], [2] outlined a need to document
which intf type is used for DP and which one is used for eDP interfaces.

This series implements my proposal [3]:

- Keep INTF_EDP reserved for 8x74/8x84
- Use INTF_DP for all contemporary DP and eDP ports
- Documet this in dpu_hw_mdss.h
- Remove INTF_EDP usage in dpu1 driver.

Main reasons behind this proposal:
- It's not always possible to separate eDP and DP. For example INTF_5 on
  sc7280 is connected to combo eDP/DP PHY.
- Using INTF_EDP would require us to split too many pieces, ending up
  with a singnificant amount of code duplication...
- ... for nothing. From the DPU point of view there is no difference
  between DP and eDP interfaces as found on current SoC generations.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/0dac8ffa-89a6-d972-bdc1-3f7755c5169d@linaro.org/
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/be397e2e-05ab-5c18-8e2d-16c443f0a6d1@quicinc.com/
[3]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/e2fab93e-82a6-4837-4ee5-ee1b16caa84d@linaro.org/

Dmitry Baryshkov (4):
  drm/msm/dpu: document INTF_EDP/INTF_DP difference
  drm/msm/dpu: drop INTF_TYPE_MAX symbol
  drm/msm/dpu: drop obsolete INTF_EDP comment
  drm/msm/dpu: drop INTF_EDP from interface type conditions

 .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c   | 14 +-------------
 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c        |  2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_mdss.h        |  9 ++++++++-
 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)