While converting the rest of the driver to use GRAPHICS_VER() and
MEDIA_VER(), following what was done for display, some discussions went
back on what we did for display:

	1) Why is the == comparison special that deserves a separate
	macro instead of just getting the version and comparing directly
	like is done for >, >=, <=?

	2) IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() is weird in that it omits the "_VER" for
	brevity. If we remove the current users of IS_DISPLAY_VER(), we
	could actually repurpose it for a range check

With (1) there could be an advantage if we used gen_mask since multiple
conditionals be combined by the compiler in a single and instruction and
check the result. However a) INTEL_GEN() doesn't use the mask since it
would make the code bigger everywhere else and b) in the cases it made
sense, it also made sense to convert to the _RANGE() variant.

So here we repurpose IS_DISPLAY_VER() to work with a [ from, to ] range
like was the IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() and convert the current IS_DISPLAY_VER()
users to use == and != operators. Aside from the definition changes,
this was done by the following semantic patch:

	@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
	- !IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
	+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) != E1

	@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
	- IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
	+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == E1

	@@ expression dev_priv, from, until; @@
	- IS_DISPLAY_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
	+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, from, until)

Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: NJani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NLucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
[Jani: Minor conflict resolve while applying.]
Signed-off-by: NJani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210413051002.92589-4-lucas.demarchi@intel.com