Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Lisovskiy, Stanislav" <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
To: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Pimp icl+ sagv pre/post update
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:04:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220214180402.GA26059@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YgouksR7cIvoRGQA@intel.com>

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:27:30PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:00:11PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 11:18:11AM +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Add some debugs on what exactly we're doing to the QGV point mask
> > > in the icl+ sagv pre/post plane update hooks. Currently we're just
> > > guessing.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > >  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Weird I think, I had those debugs initially. Definitely remember
> > there was something similar. Was it kinda removed later?
> 
> Can't immediately see any such debugs being added or removed
> by any commit.

Ah, now actually I remember. It was initially added to intel_bw_atomic_check
to show the new qgv mask, however in one of the reviews was asked to remove
that debug as redundant.

Stan

> 
> > 
> > Stan
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> >  
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > index 8b70cdc3b58b..5d1f1a9988bb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > @@ -3818,26 +3818,22 @@ static void icl_sagv_pre_plane_update(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > >  		intel_atomic_get_old_bw_state(state);
> > >  	const struct intel_bw_state *new_bw_state =
> > >  		intel_atomic_get_new_bw_state(state);
> > > -	u32 new_mask;
> > > +	u32 old_mask, new_mask;
> > >  
> > >  	if (!new_bw_state)
> > >  		return;
> > >  
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * Nothing to mask
> > > -	 */
> > > -	if (new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask == old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask)
> > > -		return;
> > > -
> > > +	old_mask = old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask;
> > >  	new_mask = old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask | new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask;
> > >  
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * If new mask is zero - means there is nothing to mask,
> > > -	 * we can only unmask, which should be done in unmask.
> > > -	 */
> > > -	if (!new_mask)
> > > +	if (old_mask == new_mask)
> > >  		return;
> > >  
> > > +	WARN_ON(!new_bw_state->base.changed);
> > > +
> > > +	drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm, "Restricting QGV points: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
> > > +		    old_mask, new_mask);
> > > +
> > >  	/*
> > >  	 * Restrict required qgv points before updating the configuration.
> > >  	 * According to BSpec we can't mask and unmask qgv points at the same
> > > @@ -3854,19 +3850,22 @@ static void icl_sagv_post_plane_update(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > >  		intel_atomic_get_old_bw_state(state);
> > >  	const struct intel_bw_state *new_bw_state =
> > >  		intel_atomic_get_new_bw_state(state);
> > > -	u32 new_mask = 0;
> > > +	u32 old_mask, new_mask;
> > >  
> > >  	if (!new_bw_state)
> > >  		return;
> > >  
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * Nothing to unmask
> > > -	 */
> > > -	if (new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask == old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask)
> > > -		return;
> > > -
> > > +	old_mask = old_bw_state->qgv_points_mask | new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask;
> > >  	new_mask = new_bw_state->qgv_points_mask;
> > >  
> > > +	if (old_mask == new_mask)
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > > +	WARN_ON(!new_bw_state->base.changed);
> > > +
> > > +	drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm, "Relaxing QGV points: 0x%x -> 0x%x\n",
> > > +		    old_mask, new_mask);
> > > +
> > >  	/*
> > >  	 * Allow required qgv points after updating the configuration.
> > >  	 * According to BSpec we can't mask and unmask qgv points at the same
> > > -- 
> > > 2.34.1
> > > 
> 
> -- 
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-02-14 18:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-14  9:18 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/6] drm/i915: SAGV fixes Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/i915: Correctly populate use_sagv_wm for all pipes Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14 10:16   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Fix bw atomic check when switching between SAGV vs. no SAGV Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14 10:05   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14 10:24     ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-14 17:03       ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14 20:26         ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-15  8:59           ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-15 10:10             ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-15 11:02               ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-15 11:26                 ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-15 16:33                   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-15 16:52                     ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-15 16:58                       ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-15 19:18                         ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/6] drm/i915: Widen the QGV point mask Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14 17:17   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/6] drm/i915: Unconfuse pre-icl vs. icl+ intel_sagv_{pre, post}_plane_update() Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14 17:39   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/6] drm/i915: Split pre-icl vs. icl+ SAGV hooks apart Ville Syrjala
2022-02-17 18:31   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14  9:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Pimp icl+ sagv pre/post update Ville Syrjala
2022-02-14 10:00   ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14 10:27     ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-02-14 17:48       ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2022-02-14 18:04       ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav [this message]
2022-02-15 21:29 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: SAGV fixes Patchwork
2022-02-16  1:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " 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=20220214180402.GA26059@intel.com \
    --to=stanislav.lisovskiy@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