Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] drm/i915/display/icl: HW state readout for transcoder port sync config

[Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>]

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:45:39PM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:11:10PM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote:
> >After the state is committed, we readout the HW registers and compare
> >the HW state with the SW state that we just committed.
> >For Transcdoer port sync, we add master_transcoder and the
> >salves bitmask to the crtc_state, hence we need to read those during
> >the HW state readout to avoid pipe state mismatch.
> >
> >v6:
> >* Go through both parts of HW readout (Maarten)
> >* Add a WARN if the same trans configured as
> >master and slave (Ville, Maarten)
> >v5:
> >* Add return INVALID in defaut case (Maarten)
> >v4:
> >* Get power domains in master loop for get_config (Ville)
> >v3:
> >* Add TRANSCODER_D (Maarten)
> >* v3 Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> >v2:
> >* Add Transcoder_D and MISSING_CASE (Maarten)
> >
> >Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> >Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
> >Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> >Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
> >Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> >---
> >drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> >index af6b8f10f132..6e4af6ded6f0 100644
> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> >@@ -10510,6 +10510,72 @@ static void haswell_get_ddi_port_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> >	}
> >}
> >
> >+static enum transcoder transcoder_master(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >+					 enum transcoder cpu_transcoder)
> 
> I find this function name misleading since there's no indication it's
> actually reading the HW.
> 
> Maybe even inline this in the only caller? Or would a `_readout` suffix
> make sense?

I think renaming it with a _readout suffix will be good, i will do that

Manasi

> 
> >+{
> >+	u32 trans_port_sync, master_select;
> >+
> >+	trans_port_sync = I915_READ(TRANS_DDI_FUNC_CTL2(cpu_transcoder));
> >+
> >+	if ((trans_port_sync & PORT_SYNC_MODE_ENABLE) == 0)
> >+		return INVALID_TRANSCODER;
> >+
> >+	master_select = trans_port_sync &
> >+			PORT_SYNC_MODE_MASTER_SELECT_MASK;
> >+	switch (master_select) {
> >+	case 1:
> >+		return TRANSCODER_A;
> >+	case 2:
> >+		return TRANSCODER_B;
> >+	case 3:
> >+		return TRANSCODER_C;
> >+	case 4:
> >+		return TRANSCODER_D;
> >+	default:
> >+		MISSING_CASE(master_select);
> >+		return INVALID_TRANSCODER;
> >+	}
> >+}
> >+
> >+static void icelake_get_trans_port_sync_config(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> >+					       struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config)
> 
> >+{
> >+	struct drm_device *dev = crtc->base.dev;
> >+	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
> >+	u32 transcoders;
> >+	enum transcoder cpu_transcoder;
> >+
> >+	pipe_config->master_transcoder = transcoder_master(dev_priv,
> >+							   pipe_config->cpu_transcoder);
> >+	if (pipe_config->master_transcoder != INVALID_TRANSCODER)
> >+		pipe_config->sync_mode_slaves_mask = 0;
> >+
> >+	transcoders = BIT(TRANSCODER_A) |
> >+		BIT(TRANSCODER_B) |
> >+		BIT(TRANSCODER_C) |
> >+		BIT(TRANSCODER_D);
> >+	for_each_cpu_transcoder_masked(dev_priv, cpu_transcoder, transcoders) {
> >+		enum intel_display_power_domain power_domain;
> >+		intel_wakeref_t trans_wakeref;
> >+
> >+		power_domain = POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(cpu_transcoder);
> >+		trans_wakeref = intel_display_power_get_if_enabled(dev_priv,
> >+								   power_domain);
> >+
> >+		if (!trans_wakeref)
> >+			continue;
> >+
> >+		if (transcoder_master(dev_priv, cpu_transcoder) ==
> >+		    pipe_config->cpu_transcoder)
> >+			pipe_config->sync_mode_slaves_mask |= BIT(cpu_transcoder);
> >+
> >+		intel_display_power_put(dev_priv, power_domain, trans_wakeref);
> >+	}
> >+
> >+	WARN_ON(pipe_config->master_transcoder != INVALID_TRANSCODER &&
> >+		pipe_config->sync_mode_slaves_mask);
> >+}
> >+
> >static bool haswell_get_pipe_config(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> >				    struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config)
> >{
> >@@ -10629,6 +10695,9 @@ static bool haswell_get_pipe_config(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> >		pipe_config->pixel_multiplier = 1;
> >	}
> >
> >+	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 11)
> >+		icelake_get_trans_port_sync_config(crtc, pipe_config);
> 
> Three letters prefix for functions is much more common, so I'd stick
> with that. For Ice Lake for example there's only icelake_get_ddi_pll()
> as opposed to tons of icl_*() functions.
> 
> 
> >+
> >out:
> >	for_each_power_domain(power_domain, power_domain_mask)
> >		intel_display_power_put(dev_priv,
> >-- 
> >2.19.1
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Intel-gfx mailing list
> >Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx