Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
To: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 2/7] drm/i915: Extract cdclk requirements checking to separate function
Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 12:36:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200514193655.GA15561@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200514152145.2449-3-stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 06:21:40PM +0300, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> In Gen11+ whenever we might exceed DBuf bandwidth we might need to
> recalculate CDCLK which DBuf bandwidth is scaled with.
> Total Dbuf bw used might change based on particular plane needs.
> 
> Thus to calculate if cdclk needs to be changed it is not enough
> anymore to check plane configuration and plane min cdclk, per DBuf
> bw can be calculated only after wm/ddb calculation is done and
> all required planes are added into the state. In order to keep
> all min_cdclk related checks in one place let's extract it into
> separate function, checking and modifying any_ms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>

Separating the need_cdclk_calc setting into a new function intel_atomic_check_cdclk()
makes sense.

Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>

Manasi

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 30 ++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index 005e324d0582..e93a553a344d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -14572,8 +14572,7 @@ static bool active_planes_affects_min_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  		IS_IVYBRIDGE(dev_priv);
>  }
>  
> -static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> -				     bool *need_cdclk_calc)
> +static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(state->base.dev);
>  	struct intel_crtc_state *old_crtc_state, *new_crtc_state;
> @@ -14623,6 +14622,22 @@ static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  			return ret;
>  	}
>  
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int intel_atomic_check_cdclk(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> +				    bool *need_cdclk_calc)
> +{
> +	struct intel_cdclk_state *new_cdclk_state;
> +	int i;
> +	struct intel_plane_state *plane_state;
> +	struct intel_plane *plane;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	new_cdclk_state = intel_atomic_get_new_cdclk_state(state);
> +	if (new_cdclk_state && new_cdclk_state->force_min_cdclk_changed)
> +		*need_cdclk_calc = true;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * active_planes bitmask has been updated, and potentially
>  	 * affected planes are part of the state. We can now
> @@ -14685,7 +14700,6 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
>  	struct intel_atomic_state *state = to_intel_atomic_state(_state);
>  	struct intel_crtc_state *old_crtc_state, *new_crtc_state;
> -	struct intel_cdclk_state *new_cdclk_state;
>  	struct intel_crtc *crtc;
>  	int ret, i;
>  	bool any_ms = false;
> @@ -14796,14 +14810,10 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto fail;
>  
> -	ret = intel_atomic_check_planes(state, &any_ms);
> +	ret = intel_atomic_check_planes(state);
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto fail;
>  
> -	new_cdclk_state = intel_atomic_get_new_cdclk_state(state);
> -	if (new_cdclk_state && new_cdclk_state->force_min_cdclk_changed)
> -		any_ms = true;
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * distrust_bios_wm will force a full dbuf recomputation
>  	 * but the hardware state will only get updated accordingly
> @@ -14833,6 +14843,10 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto fail;
>  
> +	ret = intel_atomic_check_cdclk(state, &any_ms);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto fail;
> +
>  	if (any_ms) {
>  		ret = intel_modeset_calc_cdclk(state);
>  		if (ret)
> -- 
> 2.24.1.485.gad05a3d8e5
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-14 19:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-14 15:21 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 0/7] Consider DBuf bandwidth when calculating CDCLK Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 1/7] drm/i915: Decouple cdclk calculation from modeset checks Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 2/7] drm/i915: Extract cdclk requirements checking to separate function Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 19:36   ` Manasi Navare [this message]
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 3/7] drm/i915: Check plane configuration properly Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 19:38   ` Manasi Navare
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 4/7] drm/i915: Plane configuration affects CDCLK in Gen11+ Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 19:41   ` Manasi Navare
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 5/7] drm/i915: Introduce for_each_dbuf_slice_in_mask macro Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 19:57   ` Manasi Navare
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 6/7] drm/i915: Adjust CDCLK accordingly to our DBuf bw needs Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 15:43   ` Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-14 20:15     ` Manasi Navare
2020-05-14 18:26   ` kbuild test robot
2020-05-16 21:49   ` kbuild test robot
2020-05-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v8 7/7] drm/i915: Remove unneeded hack now for CDCLK Stanislav Lisovskiy
2020-05-15 15:11 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Consider DBuf bandwidth when calculating CDCLK (rev13) 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=20200514193655.GA15561@intel.com \
    --to=manasi.d.navare@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