Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 3/7] drm/i915: Introduce parameterized DBUF_CTL
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 19:35:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200128173558.GP13686@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200124084456.2961-4-stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:44:52AM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> Now start using parameterized DBUF_CTL instead
> of hardcoded, this would allow shorter access
> functions when reading or storing entire state.
> 
> Tried to implement it in a MMIO_PIPE manner, however
> DBUF_CTL1 address is higher than DBUF_CTL2, which
> implies that we have to now subtract from base
> rather than add.
> 
> v2: - Removed unneeded DBUF_CTL_DIST and DBUF_CTL_ADDR
>       macros. Started to use _PICK construct as suggested
>       by Matt Roper.
> 
> v3: - DBUF_CTL_S* to _DBUF_CTL_S*, changed X to "slice"
>       in macro(Ville Syrjälä)
>     - Introduced enum for enumerating DBUF slices(Ville Syrjälä)
> 
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> ---
>  .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c    | 30 +++++++++++--------
>  .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h    |  5 ++++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h               |  7 +++--
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c               |  2 +-
>  4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c
> index 5e1c601f0f99..a59efb24be92 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c
> @@ -4418,9 +4418,11 @@ void icl_dbuf_slices_update(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>  		return;
>  
>  	if (req_slices > hw_enabled_slices)
> -		ret = intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv, DBUF_CTL_S2, true);
> +		ret = intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv,
> +					   _DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2), true);
>  	else
> -		ret = intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv, DBUF_CTL_S2, false);
> +		ret = intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv,
> +					   _DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2), false);
>  
>  	if (ret)
>  		dev_priv->enabled_dbuf_slices_num = req_slices;
> @@ -4428,14 +4430,16 @@ void icl_dbuf_slices_update(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>  
>  static void icl_dbuf_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  {
> -	I915_WRITE(DBUF_CTL_S1, I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S1) | DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> -	I915_WRITE(DBUF_CTL_S2, I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2) | DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> -	POSTING_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2);
> +	I915_WRITE(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1),
> +		   I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1)) | DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> +	I915_WRITE(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2),
> +		   I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2)) | DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> +	POSTING_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2));
>  
>  	udelay(10);
>  
> -	if (!(I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S1) & DBUF_POWER_STATE) ||
> -	    !(I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2) & DBUF_POWER_STATE))
> +	if (!(I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1)) & DBUF_POWER_STATE) ||
> +	    !(I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2)) & DBUF_POWER_STATE))
>  		DRM_ERROR("DBuf power enable timeout\n");
>  	else
>  		/*
> @@ -4447,14 +4451,16 @@ static void icl_dbuf_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  
>  static void icl_dbuf_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  {
> -	I915_WRITE(DBUF_CTL_S1, I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S1) & ~DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> -	I915_WRITE(DBUF_CTL_S2, I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2) & ~DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> -	POSTING_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2);
> +	I915_WRITE(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1),
> +		   I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1)) & ~DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> +	I915_WRITE(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2),
> +		   I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2)) & ~DBUF_POWER_REQUEST);
> +	POSTING_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2));
>  
>  	udelay(10);
>  
> -	if ((I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S1) & DBUF_POWER_STATE) ||
> -	    (I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2) & DBUF_POWER_STATE))
> +	if ((I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S1)) & DBUF_POWER_STATE) ||
> +	    (I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2)) & DBUF_POWER_STATE))
>  		DRM_ERROR("DBuf power disable timeout!\n");
>  	else
>  		/*
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
> index 2608a65af7fa..601e000ffd0d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
> @@ -307,6 +307,11 @@ intel_display_power_put_async(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  }
>  #endif
>  
> +enum dbuf_slice {
> +	DBUF_S1,
> +	DBUF_S2,
> +};
> +
>  #define with_intel_display_power(i915, domain, wf) \
>  	for ((wf) = intel_display_power_get((i915), (domain)); (wf); \
>  	     intel_display_power_put_async((i915), (domain), (wf)), (wf) = 0)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> index b93c4c18f05c..625be54d3eae 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> @@ -7748,9 +7748,10 @@ enum {
>  #define DISP_ARB_CTL2	_MMIO(0x45004)
>  #define  DISP_DATA_PARTITION_5_6	(1 << 6)
>  #define  DISP_IPC_ENABLE		(1 << 3)
> -#define DBUF_CTL	_MMIO(0x45008)
> -#define DBUF_CTL_S1	_MMIO(0x45008)
> -#define DBUF_CTL_S2	_MMIO(0x44FE8)
> +#define DBUF_CTL_ADDR1			0x45008
> +#define DBUF_CTL_ADDR2			0x44FE8
> +#define _DBUF_CTL_S(X)			_MMIO(_PICK_EVEN(X, DBUF_CTL_ADDR1, DBUF_CTL_ADDR2))

That's not at all what I meant. Also the 'X' is still there despite what
the changelog says.

#define _DBUF_CTL_S1	0x45008
#define _DBUF_CTL_S2	0x44FE8
#define DBUF_CTL_S(slice)	_MMIO(_PICK_EVEN(slice, _DBUF_CTL_S1, _DBUF_CTL_S2))


> +#define DBUF_CTL			_DBUF_CTL_S(0)
>  #define  DBUF_POWER_REQUEST		(1 << 31)
>  #define  DBUF_POWER_STATE		(1 << 30)
>  #define GEN7_MSG_CTL	_MMIO(0x45010)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index 04f94057d6b3..b8d78e26515c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -3660,7 +3660,7 @@ u8 intel_enabled_dbuf_slices_num(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  	 * only that 1 slice enabled until we have a proper way for on-demand
>  	 * toggling of the second slice.
>  	 */
> -	if (0 && I915_READ(DBUF_CTL_S2) & DBUF_POWER_STATE)
> +	if (0 && I915_READ(_DBUF_CTL_S(DBUF_S2)) & DBUF_POWER_STATE)
>  		enabled_dbuf_slices_num++;
>  
>  	return enabled_dbuf_slices_num;
> -- 
> 2.24.1.485.gad05a3d8e5

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-28 17:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-24  8:44 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 0/7] Enable second DBuf slice for ICL and TGL Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 1/7] drm/i915: Remove skl_ddl_allocation struct Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 2/7] drm/i915: Move dbuf slice update to proper place Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 3/7] drm/i915: Introduce parameterized DBUF_CTL Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-28 17:35   ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2020-01-29  8:41     ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-01-29 11:47       ` Ville Syrjälä
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 4/7] drm/i915: Manipulate DBuf slices properly Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 5/7] drm/i915: Correctly map DBUF slices to pipes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-28 23:15   ` Matt Roper
2020-01-28 23:38     ` Matt Roper
2020-01-29  9:03     ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 6/7] drm/i915: Protect intel_dbuf_slices_update with mutex Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-28 23:33   ` Matt Roper
2020-01-29  9:22     ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-01-31 15:22     ` Ville Syrjälä
2020-01-24  8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v16 7/7] drm/i915: Update dbuf slices only with full modeset Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-01-28 23:37   ` Matt Roper
2020-01-31 15:10     ` Ville Syrjälä
2020-01-24  9:52 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for Enable second DBuf slice for ICL and TGL (rev21) Patchwork
2020-01-26  9:19 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2020-01-27  7:48   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-01-27 12:29     ` Peres, Martin
2020-01-27 13:01 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success " Patchwork
2020-01-27 13:07 ` 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=20200128173558.GP13686@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=stanislav.lisovskiy@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