All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: "Pandiyan, Dhinakaran" <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Zanoni, Paulo R" <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>,
	"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] drm/i915: Fix up CNL cdclk related limits
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 21:11:12 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170710181112.GN12629@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1499709242.4305.14.camel@dk-H97M-D3H>

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 05:34:11PM +0000, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2017-07-10 at 16:02 +0300, ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Follow the GLK path when computing cdclk and related limits. CNL
> > pipes also produce two pixels per clock, so that's what we should
> > really use. However for the purposes of pixel rate calculations we
> > will assume one pixel per clock to keep the voltage higher, at least
> > until the missing voltage scaling for DDI clocks is implemented.
> > 
> 
> Does the lack of  correct voltage scaling implementation affect only
> intel_compute_max_dotclk()? i.e., allowing a pixel rate of
> 2*max_cdclk_freq? Or does it mean cnl_calc_cdclk() cannot take into
> account pixel_rate <= 2*cdclk_freq for any frequency?
> 
> 
> With this patch, 
> bdw_adjust_min_pipe_pixel_rate() compares pixel_rate to 2*cdclk
> cnl_calc_cdclk() compares pixel_rate to 1*cdclk.
> Isn't that a discrepancy?

Hmm. Yeah. I suppose I should just squash this with patch 2/3. My
original intention for this separate patch was to respect the 2x
limit rather than the 1x limit. But since we couldn't do that I
suppose the justification for this patch has pretty much gone
away, and as you point out, it just leads to a mess.

The combination of patches 1/3+2/3 should still do the right thing
because we no longer use the pixel rate in the audio workarounds.

> 
> 
> > For the HBR2 vs. audio issue the limit should more correctly be 336
> > MHz, but the GLK limit of 316.8 MHz works just as well and results
> > in picking at least 336 MHz. Also toss in some related w/a numbers.
> 
> In this case, _adjust_min_pipe_pixel_rate() will return pixel_rate as
> 633.6 MHz, followed by cnl_calc_cdclk() returning 528 MHz cdclk. But,
> isn't the correct workaround cdclk 336 MHz?
> 
> 
> > 
> > v2: Assume 1 pixel per clock for the purposes of max pixel rate
> >     calculation until DDI clock voltage scaling is handled
> > 
> > Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_cdclk.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_cdclk.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_cdclk.c
> > index 1241e5891b29..4b8eb6a7d852 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_cdclk.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_cdclk.c
> > @@ -1752,12 +1752,13 @@ static int bdw_adjust_min_pipe_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> >  	    crtc_state->has_audio &&
> >  	    crtc_state->port_clock >= 540000 &&
> >  	    crtc_state->lane_count == 4) {
> > -		if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv))
> > -			pixel_rate = max(316800, pixel_rate);
> > -		else if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv))
> > +		if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv) || IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv)) {
> > +			/* Display WA #1145: glk,cnl */
> >  			pixel_rate = max(2 * 316800, pixel_rate);
> > -		else
> > +		} else if (IS_GEN9(dev_priv) || IS_BROADWELL(dev_priv)) {
> > +			/* Display WA #1144: skl,bxt */
> >  			pixel_rate = max(432000, pixel_rate);
> > +		}
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	/* According to BSpec, "The CD clock frequency must be at least twice
> > @@ -1766,7 +1767,7 @@ static int bdw_adjust_min_pipe_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> >  	 * two pixels per clock.
> >  	 */
> >  	if (crtc_state->has_audio && INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 9) {
> > -		if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv))
> > +		if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv) || IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv))
> >  			pixel_rate = max(2 * 2 * 96000, pixel_rate);
> >  		else
> >  			pixel_rate = max(2 * 96000, pixel_rate);
> > @@ -1999,7 +2000,14 @@ static int intel_compute_max_dotclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >  {
> >  	int max_cdclk_freq = dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq;
> >  
> > -	if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv))
> > +	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 10)
> > +		/*
> > +		 * FIXME: Allow '2 * max_cdclk_freq'
> > +		 * once DDI clock voltage requirements are
> > +		 * handled correctly.
> > +		 */
> > +		return max_cdclk_freq;
> > +	else if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv))
> >  		/*
> >  		 * FIXME: Limiting to 99% as a temporary workaround. See
> >  		 * glk_calc_cdclk() for details.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-10 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-07 10:24 [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Fix up CNL cdclk related limits ville.syrjala
2017-07-07 10:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Track minimum acceptable cdclk instead of "minimum dotclock" ville.syrjala
2017-07-07 18:28   ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-07-10 13:02   ` [PATCH v2 " ville.syrjala
2017-07-07 10:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Consolidate max_cdclk_freq check in intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk() ville.syrjala
2017-07-07 11:13 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/3] drm/i915: Fix up CNL cdclk related limits Patchwork
2017-07-07 17:54 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Rodrigo Vivi
2017-07-07 18:24   ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-07-07 18:33     ` Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
2017-07-10 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 " ville.syrjala
2017-07-10 17:34   ` Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
2017-07-10 18:11     ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2017-07-10 18:36       ` Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
2017-07-10 17:34   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2017-07-10 17:55     ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-07-10 13:21 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [v2,1/3] drm/i915: Fix up CNL cdclk related limits (rev3) Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170710181112.GN12629@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.