From: "Lisovskiy, Stanislav" <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
To: "Hogander, Jouni" <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/psr: Disable PSR before disable pipe
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:39:07 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YtEnq9fpkVAEohbQ@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dd78907477a8c19da80cbb1442c0688eb915a004.camel@intel.com>
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 08:33:43AM +0300, Hogander, Jouni wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 08:07 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > The issue here was on for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr() over the
> > new_crtc_state encoder mask, so if the CRTC was being disabled mask
> > would be zero and it would not have any chance to disable PSR.
> >
> > So here doing for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr() over the
> > old_crtc_state encoder mask and then using the new_crtc_state to
> > check if PSR needs to be disabled.
Are we sure that using old_crtc_state mask is safe here?
Because currently we would be basically mixing a usage of
encoder from old_crtc_state mask with new_crtc_state.
If you mention a specific scenario, when this happens(i.e crtc
is being disabled and new mask is 0) should we add a specific check
instructing us to use old_crtc_state mask only?
Because currently you might be touching some other scenarios as
well, that is what I'm concerned about.
Stan
> >
> > Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
> > Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 14 ++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > index e6a870641cd25..98c3c8015a5c4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > @@ -1863,7 +1863,9 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > struct intel_crtc *crtc)
> > {
> > struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(state->base.dev);
> > - const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state =
> > + const struct intel_crtc_state *old_crtc_state =
> > + intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> > + const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state =
> > intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> > struct intel_encoder *encoder;
> >
> > @@ -1871,7 +1873,7 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > return;
> >
> > for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr(state->base.dev, encoder,
> > - crtc_state-
> > >uapi.encoder_mask) {
> > + old_crtc_state-
> > >uapi.encoder_mask) {
>
> I would add comment here explaining why using encoder mask from
> old_crtc_state, but using new_crtc_state inside the loop. It's up to
> you:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
>
> > struct intel_dp *intel_dp = enc_to_intel_dp(encoder);
> > struct intel_psr *psr = &intel_dp->psr;
> > bool needs_to_disable = false;
> > @@ -1884,10 +1886,10 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > * - All planes will go inactive
> > * - Changing between PSR versions
> > */
> > - needs_to_disable |=
> > intel_crtc_needs_modeset(crtc_state);
> > - needs_to_disable |= !crtc_state->has_psr;
> > - needs_to_disable |= !crtc_state->active_planes;
> > - needs_to_disable |= crtc_state->has_psr2 != psr-
> > >psr2_enabled;
> > + needs_to_disable |=
> > intel_crtc_needs_modeset(new_crtc_state);
> > + needs_to_disable |= !new_crtc_state->has_psr;
> > + needs_to_disable |= !new_crtc_state->active_planes;
> > + needs_to_disable |= new_crtc_state->has_psr2 != psr-
> > >psr2_enabled;
> >
> > if (psr->enabled && needs_to_disable)
> > intel_psr_disable_locked(intel_dp);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-15 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-14 15:07 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" José Roberto de Souza
2022-07-14 15:07 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/psr: Disable PSR before disable pipe José Roberto de Souza
2022-07-15 5:33 ` Hogander, Jouni
2022-07-15 8:39 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav [this message]
2022-07-15 13:35 ` Souza, Jose
2022-07-14 15:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" Patchwork
2022-07-14 18:55 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" (rev2) Patchwork
2022-07-15 1:15 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-07-15 5:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" Hogander, Jouni
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=YtEnq9fpkVAEohbQ@intel.com \
--to=stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jouni.hogander@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.