Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6 1/2] drm/i915/mtl: limit second scaler vertical scaling in ver >= 14
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 23:00:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y6IigxnW4salMgXB@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220120724.196570-2-luciano.coelho@intel.com>

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 02:07:23PM +0200, Luca Coelho wrote:
> In newer hardware versions (i.e. display version >= 14), the second
> scaler doesn't support vertical scaling.
> 
> The current implementation of the scaling limits is simplified and
> only occurs when the planes are created, so we don't know which scaler
> is being used.
> 
> In order to handle separate scaling limits for horizontal and vertical
> scaling, and different limits per scaler, split the checks in two
> phases.  We first do a simple check during plane creation and use the
> best-case scenario (because we don't know the scaler that may be used
> at a later point) and then do a more specific check when the scalers
> are actually being set up.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> In v2:
>    * fix DRM_PLANE_NO_SCALING renamed macros;
> 
> In v3:
>    * No changes.
> 
> In v4:
>    * Got rid of the changes in the general planes max scale code;
>    * Added a couple of FIXMEs;
>    * Made intel_atomic_setup_scaler() return an int with errors;
> 
> In v5:
>    * Just resent with a cover letter.
> 
> In v6:
>    * Now the correct version again (same as v4).
> 
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c
> index 6621aa245caf..8373be283d8b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
>  #include "intel_global_state.h"
>  #include "intel_hdcp.h"
>  #include "intel_psr.h"
> +#include "intel_fb.h"
>  #include "skl_universal_plane.h"
>  
>  /**
> @@ -310,11 +311,11 @@ intel_crtc_destroy_state(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  	kfree(crtc_state);
>  }
>  
> -static void intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_state,
> -				      int num_scalers_need, struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
> -				      const char *name, int idx,
> -				      struct intel_plane_state *plane_state,
> -				      int *scaler_id)
> +static int intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_state,
> +				     int num_scalers_need, struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
> +				     const char *name, int idx,
> +				     struct intel_plane_state *plane_state,
> +				     int *scaler_id)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(intel_crtc->base.dev);
>  	int j;
> @@ -334,7 +335,7 @@ static void intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_sta
>  
>  	if (drm_WARN(&dev_priv->drm, *scaler_id < 0,
>  		     "Cannot find scaler for %s:%d\n", name, idx))
> -		return;
> +		return -EBUSY;
>  
>  	/* set scaler mode */
>  	if (plane_state && plane_state->hw.fb &&
> @@ -375,9 +376,69 @@ static void intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_sta
>  		mode = SKL_PS_SCALER_MODE_DYN;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * FIXME: we should also check the scaler factors for pfit, so
> +	 * this shouldn't be tied directly to planes.
> +	 */
> +	if (plane_state && plane_state->hw.fb) {
> +		const struct drm_framebuffer *fb = plane_state->hw.fb;
> +		struct drm_rect *src = &plane_state->uapi.src;
> +		struct drm_rect *dst = &plane_state->uapi.dst;

Those can be const.

> +		int hscale, vscale, max_vscale, max_hscale;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * FIXME: When two scalers are needed, but only one of
> +		 * them needs to downscale, we should make sure that
> +		 * the one that needs downscaling support is assigned
> +		 * as the first scaler, so we don't reject downscaling
> +		 * unnecessarily.
> +		 */
> +
> +		if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 14) {
> +			/*
> +			 * On versions 14 and up, only the first
> +			 * scaler supports a vertical scaling factor
> +			 * of more than 1.0, while a horizontal
> +			 * scaling factor of 3.0 is supported.
> +			 */
> +			max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> +			if (*scaler_id == 0)
> +				max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> +			else
> +				max_vscale = 0x10000;
> +
> +		} else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 10 ||
> +			   !intel_format_info_is_yuv_semiplanar(fb->format, fb->modifier)) {
> +			max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> +			max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> +		} else {
> +			max_hscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> +			max_vscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> +		}

We'd want something along these lines if we want to handle 
the hq vs. dyn scaler stuff correctly.

if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 14) {
	...
} else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 10)
	max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
	max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
} else if (mode == NV12) {
	max_hscale = 0x20000 - 1;
	max_vscale = 0x20000 - 1;
} else if (mode == HQ || src_w <= 2048) {
	max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
	max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
} else {
	max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
	max_vscale = 0x20000 - 1;
}

Though we could leave that for a followup patch, in which
case perhaps add a FIXME.

> +
> +		/* Check if required scaling is within limits */
> +		hscale = drm_rect_calc_hscale(src, dst, 1, max_hscale);
> +		vscale = drm_rect_calc_vscale(src, dst, 1, max_vscale);
> +
> +		if (hscale < 0 || vscale < 0) {
> +			drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm,
> +				    "Scaler %d doesn't support required plane scaling\n",
> +				    *scaler_id);
> +			drm_rect_debug_print("src: ", src, true);
> +			drm_rect_debug_print("dst: ", dst, false);
> +
> +			scaler_state->scalers[*scaler_id].in_use = 0;
> +			*scaler_id = -1;

There should be no need to undo stuff like this.

> +
> +			return -EOPNOTSUPP;

We typically just go with -EINVAL for pretty much everything.
Given the number of things that can go wrong no one can realistically
figure out what happened/how to resolve it based on the errno alone
anyway.

> +		}
> +	}
> +
>  	drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm, "Attached scaler id %u.%u to %s:%d\n",
>  		    intel_crtc->pipe, *scaler_id, name, idx);
>  	scaler_state->scalers[*scaler_id].mode = mode;
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  /**
> @@ -437,7 +498,7 @@ int intel_atomic_setup_scalers(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>  	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(scaler_state->scaler_users) * 8; i++) {
>  		int *scaler_id;
>  		const char *name;
> -		int idx;
> +		int idx, ret;
>  
>  		/* skip if scaler not required */
>  		if (!(scaler_state->scaler_users & (1 << i)))
> @@ -494,9 +555,11 @@ int intel_atomic_setup_scalers(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>  			scaler_id = &plane_state->scaler_id;
>  		}
>  
> -		intel_atomic_setup_scaler(scaler_state, num_scalers_need,
> -					  intel_crtc, name, idx,
> -					  plane_state, scaler_id);
> +		ret = intel_atomic_setup_scaler(scaler_state, num_scalers_need,
> +						intel_crtc, name, idx,
> +						plane_state, scaler_id);
> +		if (ret < 0)
> +			return ret;
>  	}
>  
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 2.38.1

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-20 21:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-20 12:07 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6 0/2] drm/i915/mtl: handle some MTL scaler limitations Luca Coelho
2022-12-20 12:07 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6 1/2] drm/i915/mtl: limit second scaler vertical scaling in ver >= 14 Luca Coelho
2022-12-20 21:00   ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2022-12-23 12:12     ` Coelho, Luciano
2022-12-20 12:07 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v6 2/2] drm/i915/mtl: Limit scaler input to 4k in plane scaling Luca Coelho
2022-12-20 21:10   ` Ville Syrjälä
2022-12-23 12:44     ` Coelho, Luciano

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=Y6IigxnW4salMgXB@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=luciano.coelho@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