public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
To: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] drm/i915: Reinstate an early latency==0 check for skl+
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 15:54:30 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190129235430.GE8802@mdroper-desk.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181221171436.8218-3-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 07:14:29PM +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> 
> I thought we could remove all the early latency==0 checks
> and rely on skl_wm_method{1,2}() checking for it. But
> skl_compute_plane_wm() applies a bunch of workarounds to bump
> up the latency before calling those guys so clearly it won't
> end up doing the right thing. Also not sure if the calculations
> based on the method1/2 results are safe agaisnt overflows so
> it might not work all that well in any case. Let's put the
> early check back.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

Should we remove the tests from skl_wm_method{1,2}() now?  I suppose
someone could still use the debugfs interface to set a latency value of
exactly (UINT32_MAX - workaround amount) to make latency wrap around and
hit 0, but I'm not sure if that's really any worse than if they shoot
themselves in the foot by setting a too-low non-zero latency.  I don't
think we divide by latency anywhere.

Either way,

Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>


> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index d132ef10fa60..0aac7e7b660f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -4701,6 +4701,9 @@ static void skl_compute_plane_wm(const struct intel_crtc_state *cstate,
>  		to_intel_atomic_state(cstate->base.state);
>  	bool apply_memory_bw_wa = skl_needs_memory_bw_wa(state);
>  
> +	if (latency == 0)
> +		return;
> +
>  	/* Display WA #1141: kbl,cfl */
>  	if ((IS_KABYLAKE(dev_priv) || IS_COFFEELAKE(dev_priv) ||
>  	    IS_CNL_REVID(dev_priv, CNL_REVID_A0, CNL_REVID_B0)) &&
> -- 
> 2.19.2
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Matt Roper
Graphics Software Engineer
IoTG Platform Enabling & Development
Intel Corporation
(916) 356-2795
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-01-29 23:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-21 17:14 [PATCH 0/9] skl+ watermark stuff Ville Syrjala
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 1/9] drm/i915: Don't ignore level 0 lines watermark for glk+ Ville Syrjala
2019-01-28  8:40   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 2/9] drm/i915: Reinstate an early latency==0 check for skl+ Ville Syrjala
2019-01-28  8:34   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper [this message]
2019-01-30 14:25     ` Ville Syrjälä
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 3/9] drm/i915: Fix bits vs. bytes mixup in dbuf block size computation Ville Syrjala
2019-01-28  8:43   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 4/9] drm/i915: Fix > vs >= mismatch in watermark/ddb calculations Ville Syrjala
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 5/9] drm/i915: Account for minimum ddb allocation restrictions Ville Syrjala
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 6/9] drm/i915: Pass dev_priv to skl_needs_memory_bw_wa() Ville Syrjala
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 7/9] drm/i915: Drop the definite article in front of SAGV Ville Syrjala
2018-12-21 17:40   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 8/9] drm/i915: Drop the pointless linetime==0 check Ville Syrjala
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:14 ` [PATCH 9/9] drm/i915: Use IS_GEN9_LP() for the linetime w/a check Ville Syrjala
2018-12-21 17:39   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2019-01-29 23:54   ` Matt Roper
2018-12-21 17:49 ` ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for skl+ watermark stuff Patchwork
2018-12-21 18:05 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2018-12-21 23:15 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork

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=20190129235430.GE8802@mdroper-desk.amr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@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