From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] drm/i915/dsb: Inline dsb_vblank_delay() into intel_dsb_wait_for_delayed_vblank()
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 10:42:44 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aNTydBiwrEr6hrGQ@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250925022352.3129859-1-ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 07:53:52AM +0530, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
> Drop the now single-use dsb_vblank_delay() helper and inline its logic
> directly into intel_dsb_wait_for_delayed_vblank().
>
> This will help to keep all VRR related wait stuff in one place.
>
> v2: Use intel_scanlines_to_usecs() in intel_dsb_wait_usec(). (Ville)
>
> Signed-off-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c | 59 +++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> index ae8574880ef2..4ad4efbf9253 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> @@ -115,24 +115,6 @@ static bool pre_commit_is_vrr_active(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> return old_crtc_state->vrr.enable && !intel_crtc_vrr_disabling(state, crtc);
> }
>
> -static int dsb_vblank_delay(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> - struct intel_crtc *crtc)
> -{
> - const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state =
> - intel_pre_commit_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> -
> - if (pre_commit_is_vrr_active(state, crtc))
> - /*
> - * When the push is sent during vblank it will trigger
> - * on the next scanline, hence we have up to one extra
> - * scanline until the delayed vblank occurs after
> - * TRANS_PUSH has been written.
> - */
> - return crtc_state->set_context_latency + 1;
> - else
> - return intel_mode_vblank_delay(&crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode);
> -}
> -
> static int dsb_vtotal(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> struct intel_crtc *crtc)
> {
> @@ -821,26 +803,37 @@ void intel_dsb_wait_for_delayed_vblank(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> struct intel_crtc *crtc = dsb->crtc;
> const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state =
> intel_pre_commit_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> - int usecs = intel_scanlines_to_usecs(&crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode,
> - dsb_vblank_delay(state, crtc));
> + const struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode =
> + &crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode;
> + int wait_scanlines;
>
> - /*
> - * If the push happened before the vmin decision boundary
> - * we don't know how far we are from the undelayed vblank.
> - * Wait until we're past the vmin safe window, at which
> - * point we're SCL lines away from the delayed vblank.
> - *
> - * If the push happened after the vmin decision boundary
> - * the hardware itself guarantees that we're SCL lines
> - * away from the delayed vblank, and we won't be inside
> - * the vmin safe window so this extra wait does nothing.
> - */
> - if (pre_commit_is_vrr_active(state, crtc))
> + if (pre_commit_is_vrr_active(state, crtc)) {
> + /*
> + * If the push happened before the vmin decision boundary
> + * we don't know how far we are from the undelayed vblank.
> + * Wait until we're past the vmin safe window, at which
> + * point we're SCL lines away from the delayed vblank.
> + *
> + * If the push happened after the vmin decision boundary
> + * the hardware itself guarantees that we're SCL lines
> + * away from the delayed vblank, and we won't be inside
> + * the vmin safe window so this extra wait does nothing.
> + */
> intel_dsb_wait_scanline_out(state, dsb,
> intel_vrr_safe_window_start(crtc_state),
> intel_vrr_vmin_safe_window_end(crtc_state));
> + /*
> + * When the push is sent during vblank it will trigger
> + * on the next scanline, hence we have up to one extra
> + * scanline until the delayed vblank occurs after
> + * TRANS_PUSH has been written.
> + */
> + wait_scanlines = crtc_state->set_context_latency + 1;
> + } else {
> + wait_scanlines = intel_mode_vblank_delay(adjusted_mode);
> + }
>
> - intel_dsb_wait_usec(dsb, usecs);
> + intel_dsb_wait_usec(dsb, intel_scanlines_to_usecs(adjusted_mode, wait_scanlines));
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.45.2
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-25 7:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-24 14:15 [PATCH 00/10] Introduce set_context_latency and refactor VRR/DSB timing logic Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 01/10] drm/i915/psr: s/intel_psr_min_vblank_delay/intel_psr_min_set_context_latency Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 02/10] drm/i915/display: Add set_context_latency to crtc_state Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 03/10] drm/i915/vrr: Use set_context_latency instead of intel_vrr_real_vblank_delay() Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 04/10] drm/i915/vrr: Use SCL for computing guardband Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 05/10] drm/i915/dsb: s/intel_dsb_wait_vblank_delay/intel_dsb_wait_for_delayed_vblank Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 06/10] drm/i915/display: Wait for scl start instead of dsb_wait_vblanks Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 07/10] drm/i915/reg_defs: Add REG_FIELD_MAX wrapper for FIELD_MAX() Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 08/10] drm/i915/vrr: Clamp guardband as per hardware and timing constraints Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 09/10] drm/i915/display: Drop intel_vrr_vblank_delay and use set_context_latency Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 14:15 ` [PATCH 10/10] drm/i915/dsb: Inline dsb_vblank_delay() into intel_dsb_wait_for_delayed_vblank() Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-24 15:20 ` Ville Syrjälä
2025-09-25 2:23 ` Ankit Nautiyal
2025-09-25 7:42 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2025-09-24 14:37 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for Introduce set_context_latency and refactor VRR/DSB timing logic (rev4) Patchwork
2025-09-24 14:52 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-09-24 15:13 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-09-24 17:13 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-09-24 19:21 ` ✓ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-09-25 0:20 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-09-25 3:21 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for Introduce set_context_latency and refactor VRR/DSB timing logic (rev5) Patchwork
2025-09-25 3:36 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-09-25 3:38 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-09-25 3:55 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-09-25 9:16 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-09-25 11:31 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-09-25 12:33 ` ✓ i915.CI.Full: success " Patchwork
2025-09-25 13:36 ` [PATCH 00/10] Introduce set_context_latency and refactor VRR/DSB timing logic Nautiyal, Ankit K
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=aNTydBiwrEr6hrGQ@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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.