[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-28 Thread Jingoo Han
On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:31 PM, Jindal, Sonika wrote: > On 8/26/2014 4:58 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: > >> From: Sonika Jindal > >> > >> Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the > >>

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-28 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 03:11:08PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > So we're left with > > > > #define DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_LEVEL_0 (0 << 0) > > > > Vs > > > > #define DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_LEVEL(x) ((x) << 0) > > > > The second variant doesn't really bring much more clarity? Can

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-27 Thread Thierry Reding
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 01:28:19PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: > > > From: Sonika Jindal > > > > > > Adding new defines, older one will be removed in

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-27 Thread Thierry Reding
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:51:35AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > > An alternative would be to provide a second set of defines for eDP 1.4 > > > where the name implies the meaning and then use them as appropriate. > > > > We went

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-27 Thread Jindal, Sonika
On 8/26/2014 4:58 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: >> From: Sonika Jindal >> >> Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the >> series. >> This is to rename the defines to have levels instead of val

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-27 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:47:54AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > An alternative would be to provide a second set of defines for eDP 1.4 > > where the name implies the meaning and then use them as appropriate. > > We went through the idea as well and: > > I actually think the nominal voltage sw

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-27 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 01:28:19PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: > > From: Sonika Jindal > > > > Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the > > series. > > This is to rename the defines to ha

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-26 Thread Thierry Reding
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: > From: Sonika Jindal > > Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the series. > This is to rename the defines to have levels instead of values for vswing and > pre-emph levels as the values may

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-11 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal at intel.com wrote: > From: Sonika Jindal > > Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the series. > This is to rename the defines to have levels instead of values for vswing and > pre-emph levels as the values may

[PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines

2014-08-08 Thread sonika.jin...@intel.com
From: Sonika Jindal Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the series. This is to rename the defines to have levels instead of values for vswing and pre-emph levels as the values may differ in other scenarios like low vswing of eDP1.4 where the values are different. D