Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] lib/i915_blt: Remove src == dst pitch restriction

Karolina Stolarek
2022-12-13T15:38:15Z

On 12.12.2022 13:50, Zbigniew Kempczyński wrote:
> During debugging phase we established there's not necessary to enforce
> same pitch for destination surface in FULL_RESOLVE mode. Relax this
> condition allowing caller to pass requirement surface configuration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zbigniew Kempczyński <zbigniew.kempczynski@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/i915/i915_blt.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/i915/i915_blt.c b/lib/i915/i915_blt.c
> index 3776c56c60..42c28623f9 100644
> --- a/lib/i915/i915_blt.c
> +++ b/lib/i915/i915_blt.c
> @@ -317,13 +317,11 @@ static void fill_data(struct gen12_block_copy_data *data,
> data->dw00.special_mode = __special_mode(blt);
> data->dw00.length = extended_command ? 20 : 10;
>
> - if (__special_mode(blt) == SM_FULL_RESOLVE && blt->src.tiling == T_TILE64) {
> - data->dw01.dst_pitch = blt->src.pitch - 1;
> + if (__special_mode(blt) == SM_FULL_RESOLVE)

"blt->src.tiling == T_TILE64" part was introduced in commit cdc0258a4672
("lib/i915_blt: Narrow setting same pitch and aux-ccs to Tile64 only").
I know it's a bit nit-picky, but could we revert that change (as it
looks like it's not necessary), and have a separate commit that removes
data->dw01.dst_pitch = blt->src.pitch - 1?

The question remains -- what actually caused the regression for Tile4
and xmajor? Was it because of the pitch settings? I run the tests a
couple of times in the row after applying this patch and everything
worked as expected.

All the best,
Karolina

> data->dw01.dst_aux_mode = __aux_mode(&blt->src);
> - } else {
> - data->dw01.dst_pitch = blt->dst.pitch - 1;
> + else
> data->dw01.dst_aux_mode = __aux_mode(&blt->dst);
> - }
> + data->dw01.dst_pitch = blt->dst.pitch - 1;
>
> data->dw01.dst_mocs = blt->dst.mocs;
> data->dw01.dst_compression = blt->dst.compression;