All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>,
	Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>,
	Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/atomic: Add the crtc to affected crtc only if uapi.enable = true
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:37:52 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVrnkOLIdsQBEVsK@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211004113629.23715-1-manasi.d.navare@intel.com>

On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:36:29AM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote:
> In case of a modeset where a mode gets split across mutiple CRTCs
> in the driver specific implementation (bigjoiner in i915) we wrongly count
> the affected CRTCs based on the drm_crtc_mask and indicate the stolen CRTC as
> an affected CRTC in atomic_check_only().
> This triggers a warning since affected CRTCs doent match requested CRTC.
> 
> To fix this in such bigjoiner configurations, we should only
> increment affected crtcs if that CRTC is enabled in UAPI not
> if it is just used internally in the driver to split the mode.
> 
> There is no way we can adjust requested_crtc calculation as suggested
> in review comments because the crtc gets stolen only after the atomic_check call.

The uapi crtc_state->enable value does not change due to bigjoiner
stealing the crtc. So I don't understand what you're trying to say
here.

The only internal thing that could alter the set of enabled crtcs
on the uapi level is update_connector_routing(true), but that is
always called before drm_atomic_check_only().

> 
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>
> Cc: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> index ff1416cd609a..44e7ebf43a2a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> @@ -1360,8 +1360,10 @@ int drm_atomic_check_only(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, new_crtc_state, i)
> -		affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc);
> +	for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, new_crtc_state, i) {
> +		if (new_crtc_state->enable)
> +			affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc);
> +	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * For commits that allow modesets drivers can add other CRTCs to the
> -- 
> 2.19.1

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>,
	Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>,
	Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/atomic: Add the crtc to affected crtc only if uapi.enable = true
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:37:52 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVrnkOLIdsQBEVsK@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211004113629.23715-1-manasi.d.navare@intel.com>

On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:36:29AM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote:
> In case of a modeset where a mode gets split across mutiple CRTCs
> in the driver specific implementation (bigjoiner in i915) we wrongly count
> the affected CRTCs based on the drm_crtc_mask and indicate the stolen CRTC as
> an affected CRTC in atomic_check_only().
> This triggers a warning since affected CRTCs doent match requested CRTC.
> 
> To fix this in such bigjoiner configurations, we should only
> increment affected crtcs if that CRTC is enabled in UAPI not
> if it is just used internally in the driver to split the mode.
> 
> There is no way we can adjust requested_crtc calculation as suggested
> in review comments because the crtc gets stolen only after the atomic_check call.

The uapi crtc_state->enable value does not change due to bigjoiner
stealing the crtc. So I don't understand what you're trying to say
here.

The only internal thing that could alter the set of enabled crtcs
on the uapi level is update_connector_routing(true), but that is
always called before drm_atomic_check_only().

> 
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>
> Cc: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk>
> Cc: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> index ff1416cd609a..44e7ebf43a2a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> @@ -1360,8 +1360,10 @@ int drm_atomic_check_only(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, new_crtc_state, i)
> -		affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc);
> +	for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, new_crtc_state, i) {
> +		if (new_crtc_state->enable)
> +			affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc);
> +	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * For commits that allow modesets drivers can add other CRTCs to the
> -- 
> 2.19.1

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-04 11:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-04 11:36 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/atomic: Add the crtc to affected crtc only if uapi.enable = true Manasi Navare
2021-10-04 11:36 ` Manasi Navare
2021-10-04 11:37 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2021-10-04 11:37   ` Ville Syrjälä

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=YVrnkOLIdsQBEVsK@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=contact@emersion.fr \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=daniels@collabora.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=manasi.d.navare@intel.com \
    --cc=pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk \
    /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.