From: Ander Conselvan De Oliveira <conselvan2@gmail.com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] drm/i915: Calculate watermark related members in the crtc_state, v3.
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:22:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1448443379.2907.10.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56547A50.9010606@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 15:55 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 24-11-15 om 15:03 schreef Ander Conselvan De Oliveira:
> > On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 16:07 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > > This removes pre/post_wm_update from intel_crtc->atomic, and
> > > creates atomic state for it in intel_crtc.
> > >
> > > Changes since v1:
> > > - Rebase on top of wm changes.
> > > Changes since v2:
> > > - Split disable_cxsr into a separate patch.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c | 1 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 31 +++++++++++++------------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 2 +-
> > > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c
> > > index 9f0638a37b6d..4625f8a9ba12 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c
> > > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ intel_crtc_duplicate_state(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> > > crtc_state->update_pipe = false;
> > > crtc_state->disable_lp_wm = false;
> > > crtc_state->disable_cxsr = false;
> > > + crtc_state->wm_changed = false;
> > >
> > > return &crtc_state->base;
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > > index 5ee64e67ad8a..db4995406277 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > > @@ -4741,6 +4741,8 @@ intel_pre_disable_primary(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> > > static void intel_post_plane_update(struct intel_crtc *crtc)
> > > {
> > > struct intel_crtc_atomic_commit *atomic = &crtc->atomic;
> > > + struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config =
> > > + to_intel_crtc_state(crtc->base.state);
> > > struct drm_device *dev = crtc->base.dev;
> > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> > >
> > > @@ -4751,7 +4753,7 @@ static void intel_post_plane_update(struct
> > > intel_crtc
> > > *crtc)
> > >
> > > crtc->wm.cxsr_allowed = true;
> > >
> > > - if (crtc->atomic.update_wm_post)
> > > + if (pipe_config->wm_changed)
> > > intel_update_watermarks(&crtc->base);
> > This adds an extra call to intel_update_watermarks() for the case where
> > previously update_wm_pre would be set. This won't cause extra register
> > writes
> > because of the dirty check, but I think it deserves a note in the commit
> > message.
> I think intel_update_watermarks needs to be fixed to take a crtc_state and
> whether pre/post commit is used.
>
> It looks to me like doing anything else could bug if watermarks are changed
> with 1 plane becoming visible and the other invisible..
> > >
> > > if (atomic->update_fbc)
> > > @@ -4784,6 +4786,9 @@ static void intel_pre_plane_update(struct intel_crtc
> > > *crtc)
> > > crtc->wm.cxsr_allowed = false;
> > > intel_set_memory_cxsr(dev_priv, false);
> > > }
> > > +
> > > + if (!needs_modeset(&pipe_config->base) && pipe_config
> > > ->wm_changed)
> > > + intel_update_watermarks(&crtc->base);
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void intel_crtc_disable_planes(struct drm_crtc *crtc, unsigned
> > > plane_mask)
> > > @@ -11706,25 +11711,18 @@ int intel_plane_atomic_calc_changes(struct
> > > drm_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> > > plane->base.id, was_visible, visible,
> > > turn_off, turn_on, mode_changed);
> > >
> > > - if (turn_on) {
> > > - intel_crtc->atomic.update_wm_pre = true;
> > > - /* must disable cxsr around plane enable/disable */
> > > - if (plane->type != DRM_PLANE_TYPE_CURSOR) {
> > > - pipe_config->disable_cxsr = true;
> > > - /* to potentially re-enable cxsr */
> > > - intel_crtc->atomic.wait_vblank = true;
> > > - intel_crtc->atomic.update_wm_post = true;
> > > - }
> > > - } else if (turn_off) {
> > > - intel_crtc->atomic.update_wm_post = true;
> > > + if (turn_on || turn_off) {
> > > + pipe_config->wm_changed = true;
> > > +
> > > /* must disable cxsr around plane enable/disable */
> > > if (plane->type != DRM_PLANE_TYPE_CURSOR) {
> > > if (is_crtc_enabled)
> > > intel_crtc->atomic.wait_vblank = true;
> > > pipe_config->disable_cxsr = true;
> > > }
> > > - } else if (intel_wm_need_update(plane, plane_state)) {
> > > - intel_crtc->atomic.update_wm_pre = true;
> > > + } else if ((was_visible || visible) &&
> > So this avoids watermark changes when the plane is not visible before or
> > after
> > the update. Wouldn't it be better to fix intel_wm_need_update() instead if
> > returns true in that case?
>
> If visible is changed wm_changed = true is always set. It would go through the
> (turn_on || turn_off) case.
>
> I guess checking was_visible || visible is overkill, and could be changed to
> just visible && intel_wm_need_update(plane, plane_state).
What I meant is that I find odd that intel_wm_need_update() returns true when
both was_visible and visible is false. Since that function is supposed to
compare two plane states and tell us if a wm update is needed, I'd rather add
the visible check there.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-25 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-19 15:07 [PATCH 00/12] Remove intel_crtc->atomic and fix BAT! Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 01/12] drm/i915: Move disable_cxsr to the crtc_state Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-24 12:24 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 02/12] drm/i915: Calculate watermark related members in the crtc_state, v3 Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-24 14:03 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-24 14:55 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 9:22 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira [this message]
2015-11-30 8:52 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2015-12-03 12:49 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] drm/i915: Calculate watermark related members in the crtc_state, v4 Maarten Lankhorst
2015-12-03 14:32 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 03/12] drm/i915/skl: Update watermarks before the crtc is disabled Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 9:33 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 04/12] drm/i915: Remove double wait_for_vblank on broadwell Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 9:44 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-12-08 14:14 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-12-09 15:27 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2015-12-10 8:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 05/12] drm/i915: Kill off intel_crtc->atomic.wait_vblank, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 12:21 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-25 12:38 ` Imre Deak
2015-11-25 13:37 ` Daniel Stone
2015-11-25 12:39 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 06/12] drm/i915: Remove intel_crtc->atomic.disable_ips Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 12:51 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 07/12] drm/i915: Remove atomic.pre_disable_primary Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 08/12] drm/i915: Remove update_sprite_watermarks Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 09/12] drm/i915: Remove some post-commit members from intel_crtc->atomic, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-25 13:11 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 10/12] drm/i915: Nuke fbc members from intel_crtc->atomic Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-26 11:28 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 11/12] drm/i915: Keep track of the cdclk as if all crtc's were active Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-26 13:31 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-26 13:32 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-12-21 13:17 ` Mika Kahola
2015-11-19 15:07 ` [PATCH 12/12] drm/i915: Calculate visibility in check_plane correctly regardless of dpms Maarten Lankhorst
2015-11-26 13:48 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-11-30 9:45 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2015-12-21 13:27 ` Mika Kahola
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=1448443379.2907.10.camel@gmail.com \
--to=conselvan2@gmail.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox