On Fri, 25 Oct 2024, Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.so...@intel.com> wrote:
> Quoting Clint Taylor (2024-10-24 19:31:04-03:00)
>>@@ -460,7 +479,8 @@ void intel_pmdemand_program_dbuf(struct drm_i915_private
>>*i915,
>> }
>>
>> static void
>>-intel_pmdemand_update_params(const struct intel_pmdemand_state *new,
>>+intel_pmdemand_update_params(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>>+ const struct intel_pmdemand_state *new,
>> const struct intel_pmdemand_state *old,
>> u32 *reg1, u32 *reg2, bool serialized)
>
> Jani ask been asking in other patches not to add new i915 variables or
> parameters.
Yes.
> As such, I think we should make intel_pmdemand_update_params() receive
> struct intel_display *display instead of i915. The caller can be adapted
> to simply use intel_pmdemand_update_params(&i915->display, ...).
Actually always prefer adding a local display variable instead:
struct intel_display *display = to_intel_display(...);
or
struct intel_display *display = &i915->display;
Otherwise, further struct intel_display conversions wouldn't benefit
from having the display variable available, and you end up having to fix
all the inline &i915->display again.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
