From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tvrtko Ursulin Subject: Re: Taking tiling and rotation into account in watermark computations Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 12:13:44 +0100 Message-ID: <5433CAE8.8090405@linux.intel.com> References: <5432BF4D.1010900@linux.intel.com> <20141007102243.GT32511@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AAE89F69 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 2014 04:13:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20141007102243.GT32511@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: =?windows-1252?Q?Ville_Syrj=E4l=E4?= Cc: intel-gfx List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On 10/07/2014 11:22 AM, Ville Syrj=E4l=E4 wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 05:11:57PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> We need to refactor the current code a bit to allow parameters like >> plane rotation and framebuffer tiling mode be taken into account when >> calculating display watermarks. >> >> I looked into this code a bit and am at the moment a bit confused with >> what is where and why. >> >> For example the purpose of plane_config in intel_crtc seems a bit thin, >> or why it is created once on driver init. > > That thing is only used for the BIOS fb takesover. Probably should be > renamed since it's basically just some kind of duplicated fb structure > rather than a full plane config. And I don't want to extend that > duplication into the structure we use to track the plane config > otherwise. > > We now have intel_plane_state (or something like that) that's going to > form the basis of the plane config tracking. > >> Then again watermark >> parameters are embedded in intel_plane, which is separate from >> plane_config. > > The per-plane watermark stuff should get moved into the > intel_plane_state. But that requires that I find the time to get > back to the watermark code and actually finish off whatever patches > I have still pending. So the current state of the watermark code > was just meant to be a short lived thing while it continues to > evolve. Sadly the remaining stuff didn't get in when I had the > time to work on it and now I can't seem to find any time for it. > But hopefully soon I'll have some time for this again (famous > last words). Oh good, at least my feeling that things are a bit messy here wasn't = wrong. :) But considering what you said, I am not sure where does that = leave "me"? I need to have working Y-tiled scanout as a dependency for another = feature we are working on. Former is mostly implemented by Damien, just = needs this per plane watermark corrections. I can put in some hacks to make it work locally and unblock development, = but I think sooner rather than later we will need a proper solution. If = nothing then to move Damien's work out of the private branch. Or in other words, is there something someone could do to help you find = some time to finish the stuff you got pending? Regards, Tvrtko