From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: "Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/skl: Allow universal planes to position
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:23:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5620EC51.8080207@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5616303A.5060809@linux.intel.com>
On 08/10/15 09:58, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> On 07/10/15 15:19, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 07:28:10PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 08:16:19AM -0700, Matt Roper wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 05:42:42PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 07:29:54AM -0700, Matt Roper wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 02:32:47PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/04/15 10:07, Sonika Jindal wrote:
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com>
>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 7 ++++++-
>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>>>>>>>> index ceb2e61..f0bbc22 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -12150,16 +12150,21 @@ intel_check_primary_plane(struct
>>>>>>>> drm_plane *plane,
>>>>>>>> struct drm_rect *dest = &state->dst;
>>>>>>>> struct drm_rect *src = &state->src;
>>>>>>>> const struct drm_rect *clip = &state->clip;
>>>>>>>> + bool can_position = false;
>>>>>>>> int ret;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> crtc = crtc ? crtc : plane->crtc;
>>>>>>>> intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9)
>>>>>>>> + can_position = true;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> ret = drm_plane_helper_check_update(plane, crtc, fb,
>>>>>>>> src, dest, clip,
>>>>>>>> DRM_PLANE_HELPER_NO_SCALING,
>>>>>>>> DRM_PLANE_HELPER_NO_SCALING,
>>>>>>>> - false, true, &state->visible);
>>>>>>>> + can_position, true,
>>>>>>>> + &state->visible);
>>>>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>>>> return ret;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have discovered today that, while this allows SetCrtc and SetPlane
>>>>>>> ioctls to work with frame buffers which do not cover the plane, page
>>>>>>> flips are not that lucky and fail roughly with:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [drm:drm_crtc_check_viewport] Invalid fb size 1080x1080 for CRTC
>>>>>>> viewport 1920x1080+0+0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding your explanation, but a framebuffer is
>>>>>> always
>>>>>> required to fill/cover the plane scanning out of it. What this
>>>>>> patch is
>>>>>> supposed to be allowing is for the primary plane to not cover the
>>>>>> entire
>>>>>> CRTC (since that's something that only became possible for Intel
>>>>>> hardware on the gen9+ platforms). I.e., the primary plane is now
>>>>>> allowed to positioned and resized to cover a subset of the CRTC area,
>>>>>> just like "sprite" planes have always been able to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you've got a 1080x1080 framebuffer, then it's legal to have a
>>>>>> 1080x1080 primary plane while running in 1920x1080 mode on SKL/BXT.
>>>>>> However it is not legal to size the primary plane as 1920x1080 and
>>>>>> use
>>>>>> this same 1080x1080 framebuffer with any of our interfaces (setplane,
>>>>>> setcrtc, pageflip, or atomic).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you using ioctls/libdrm directly or are you using igt_kms
>>>>>> helpers?
>>>>>> IIRC, the IGT helpers will try to be extra helpful and automatically
>>>>>> size the plane to match the framebuffer (unless you override that
>>>>>> behavior), so that might be what's causing the confusion here.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is clear as day in drm_mode_page_flip_ioctl():
>>>>> ret = drm_crtc_check_viewport(crtc, crtc->x, crtc->y, &crtc->mode,
>>>>> fb);
>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>> goto out;
>>>>>
>>>>> The fix should be easy; just extract the current src coordinates from
>>>>> the plane state and check those against the new fb size. And then hope
>>>>> that the plane state is really up to date.
>>>>
>>>> Yep, that's the conclusion we came to once Tvrtko explained what he was
>>>> seeing on IRC. I'm not sure whether non-atomic drivers have enough
>>>> state setup by the default helpers to work properly. Worst case we'll
>>>> just assume that a non-atomic driver won't support primary plane
>>>> windowing (since none have in the past) and fall back to looking at the
>>>> mode for legacy non-atomic drivers.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And I'm sure rotated cases will go boom in some other ways. Probably
>>>>> we should just switch over to using the full plane update for mmio
>>>>> flips to fix it.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah; the core looks at a drm_plane->invert_dimensions field that's
>>>> only
>>>> set by omap. That should probably be updated to look at the state's
>>>> rotation on atomic-capable drivers.
>>>
>>> We can just look at the src coordinates. Those always match the fb
>>> orientation.
>>
>> Can we just not bother with legacy pageflips on rotated planes? setplane
>> works and once you rotate it kinda gets nasty anyway.
>
> I don't know - thought it is simple enough to make it work so why not?
> Just " [PATCH] drm/i915: Consider plane rotation when calculating stride
> in skl_do_mmio_flip" I posted, plus Matt's "[PATCH] drm: Check fb
> against plane size rather than CRTC mode for pageflip" to allow smaller
> than mode planes.
>
>> The problem I see is that with legacy pageflip we also need to hack up
>> something that doesn't look at plane->state for legacy and all that for a
>> grand total of about 2 drivers, both getting converted to atomic.
>
> I'll leave the legacy/atomic/etc considerations to the experts. :)
Are we sure any efforts to support rotation in legacy page flips is not
worth it?
So far there were three patches for this: Plane programming fix (very
simple) and an IGT test case (simple as well) from me, and a sub-crtc
size plane support from Matt.
It kind of remained hanging a bit so I think it would be good to make a
definitive decision.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-16 12:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-10 9:07 [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/skl: Allow universal planes to position Sonika Jindal
2015-04-10 9:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/skl: Support for 90/270 rotation Sonika Jindal
2015-04-10 14:17 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-10 14:44 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-04-13 4:06 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-13 10:10 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-04-13 10:23 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-13 10:49 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-04-13 23:39 ` Matt Roper
2015-04-14 12:19 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-14 17:27 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-15 10:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Swapping 90 and 270 to be compliant with Xrandr Sonika Jindal
2015-04-15 10:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] Documentation/drm: Update rotation property with 90/270 and description Sonika Jindal
2015-04-15 10:27 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-15 10:29 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-15 10:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-15 10:35 ` [PATCH] " Sonika Jindal
2015-05-12 12:50 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ville Syrjälä
2015-05-13 4:27 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-05-20 6:39 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-05-20 7:49 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-05-20 14:03 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-05-28 11:05 ` [PATCH] Documentation/drm: Update rotation property Sonika Jindal
2015-05-28 11:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2015-05-12 12:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Swapping 90 and 270 to be compliant with Xrandr Ville Syrjälä
2015-05-20 8:10 ` [PATCH] " Sonika Jindal
2015-05-20 9:15 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-13 11:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/skl: Support for 90/270 rotation Damien Lespiau
2015-04-13 4:02 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-14 3:56 ` shuang.he
2015-10-06 13:32 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/skl: Allow universal planes to position Tvrtko Ursulin
2015-10-06 14:29 ` Matt Roper
2015-10-06 14:42 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-10-06 15:16 ` Matt Roper
2015-10-06 16:28 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-10-07 14:19 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-10-08 8:58 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2015-10-16 12:23 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-03-30 8:34 Sonika Jindal
2015-04-01 18:21 ` Matt Roper
2015-04-02 4:38 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-02 15:48 ` Matt Roper
2015-04-06 5:20 ` Jindal, Sonika
2015-04-07 8:16 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-04-07 8:21 ` Jindal, Sonika
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=5620EC51.8080207@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.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.