From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Recalculate CDCLK if plane scaling ratio changes
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 18:45:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wnj66x1w.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220111160812.21344-1-stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022, Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com> wrote:
> Currently we only recalculate CDCLK if active plane mask changes
> or if we do a full modeset, however according to BSpec
> required Dbuf bandwidth calculations also depend on pipe/plane
> scaling ratio, which means that CDCLK must be recalculated
> everytime plane scaling ratio changes, because it affects
> display buffer bandwidth requirements.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index bf7ce684dd8e..2c616348e993 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -7499,13 +7499,65 @@ static int intel_bigjoiner_add_affected_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static bool scaling_affects_cdclk(struct intel_plane_state *old_plane_state,
> + struct intel_plane_state *new_plane_state)
> +{
> + int old_src_w = drm_rect_width(&old_plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> + int old_src_h = drm_rect_height(&old_plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> + int old_dst_w = drm_rect_width(&old_plane_state->uapi.dst);
> + int old_dst_h = drm_rect_height(&old_plane_state->uapi.dst);
> + int new_src_w = drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> + int new_src_h = drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> + int new_dst_w = drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->uapi.dst);
> + int new_dst_h = drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->uapi.dst);
> + int old_hscale_ratio, new_hscale_ratio;
> + int old_vscale_ratio, new_vscale_ratio;
> +
> + if (needs_scaling(old_plane_state) != needs_scaling(new_plane_state))
> + return true;
> +
> + if (!old_dst_w || !old_dst_h)
> + return true;
> +
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("old_dst_w %d old_dst_h %d\n", old_dst_w, old_dst_h);
> +
> + old_hscale_ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(old_src_w, old_dst_w);
> + old_vscale_ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(old_src_h, old_dst_h);
> +
> + if (!new_dst_w || !new_dst_h)
> + return true;
> +
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("new_dst_w %d new_dst_h %d\n", new_dst_w, new_dst_h);
> +
> + new_hscale_ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(new_src_w, new_dst_w);
> + new_vscale_ratio = DIV_ROUND_UP(new_src_h, new_dst_h);
> +
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("new_hscale_ratio %d new_vscale_ratio %d "
> + "old_hscale_ratio %d old_vscale_ratio %d\n",
> + new_hscale_ratio, new_vscale_ratio,
> + old_hscale_ratio, old_vscale_ratio);
All of the debug logging seem excessive? Also, please use drm_dbg_atomic
or drm_dbg_kms instead of DRM_DEBUG_KMS for the ones that need to stay.
BR,
Jani.
> +
> + if ((old_hscale_ratio != new_hscale_ratio) ||
> + (old_vscale_ratio != new_vscale_ratio)) {
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Scaling ratios changed from %dx%d"
> + " to %dx%d - need cdclk recalc\n",
> + old_hscale_ratio, old_vscale_ratio,
> + new_hscale_ratio, new_vscale_ratio);
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> {
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(state->base.dev);
> struct intel_crtc_state *old_crtc_state, *new_crtc_state;
> struct intel_plane_state *plane_state;
> + struct intel_plane_state *old_plane_state;
> struct intel_plane *plane;
> struct intel_crtc *crtc;
> + bool need_cdclk_calc = false;
> int i, ret;
>
> ret = icl_add_linked_planes(state);
> @@ -7516,7 +7568,7 @@ static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - for_each_new_intel_plane_in_state(state, plane, plane_state, i) {
> + for_each_oldnew_intel_plane_in_state(state, plane, old_plane_state, plane_state, i) {
> ret = intel_plane_atomic_check(state, plane);
> if (ret) {
> drm_dbg_atomic(&dev_priv->drm,
> @@ -7524,6 +7576,9 @@ static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name);
> return ret;
> }
> +
> + if (scaling_affects_cdclk(old_plane_state, plane_state))
> + need_cdclk_calc = true;
> }
>
> for_each_oldnew_intel_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, old_crtc_state,
> @@ -7539,18 +7594,20 @@ static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> * the planes' minimum cdclk calculation. Add such planes
> * to the state before we compute the minimum cdclk.
> */
> - if (!active_planes_affects_min_cdclk(dev_priv))
> + if (!active_planes_affects_min_cdclk(dev_priv) && !need_cdclk_calc)
> continue;
>
> old_active_planes = old_crtc_state->active_planes & ~BIT(PLANE_CURSOR);
> new_active_planes = new_crtc_state->active_planes & ~BIT(PLANE_CURSOR);
>
> - if (hweight8(old_active_planes) == hweight8(new_active_planes))
> + if ((hweight8(old_active_planes) == hweight8(new_active_planes)) && !need_cdclk_calc)
> continue;
>
> ret = intel_crtc_add_planes_to_state(state, crtc, new_active_planes);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> +
> +
> }
>
> return 0;
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-11 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-11 16:08 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Recalculate CDCLK if plane scaling ratio changes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2022-01-11 16:45 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2022-01-12 9:55 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-01-11 18:39 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2022-01-11 18:55 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-01-12 0:26 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-01-12 13:50 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Ville Syrjälä
2022-01-12 14:39 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-01-12 14:50 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-01-13 7:29 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-01-12 13:06 Stanislav Lisovskiy
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=87wnj66x1w.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=stanislav.lisovskiy@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.