From: "Lisovskiy, Stanislav" <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
To: "Hogander, Jouni" <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/psr: Disable PSR before disable pipe
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:39:07 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YtEnq9fpkVAEohbQ@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dd78907477a8c19da80cbb1442c0688eb915a004.camel@intel.com>
On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 08:33:43AM +0300, Hogander, Jouni wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 08:07 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > The issue here was on for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr() over the
> > new_crtc_state encoder mask, so if the CRTC was being disabled mask
> > would be zero and it would not have any chance to disable PSR.
> >
> > So here doing for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr() over the
> > old_crtc_state encoder mask and then using the new_crtc_state to
> > check if PSR needs to be disabled.
Are we sure that using old_crtc_state mask is safe here?
Because currently we would be basically mixing a usage of
encoder from old_crtc_state mask with new_crtc_state.
If you mention a specific scenario, when this happens(i.e crtc
is being disabled and new mask is 0) should we add a specific check
instructing us to use old_crtc_state mask only?
Because currently you might be touching some other scenarios as
well, that is what I'm concerned about.
Stan
> >
> > Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
> > Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 14 ++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > index e6a870641cd25..98c3c8015a5c4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > @@ -1863,7 +1863,9 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > struct intel_crtc *crtc)
> > {
> > struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(state->base.dev);
> > - const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state =
> > + const struct intel_crtc_state *old_crtc_state =
> > + intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> > + const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state =
> > intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc);
> > struct intel_encoder *encoder;
> >
> > @@ -1871,7 +1873,7 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > return;
> >
> > for_each_intel_encoder_mask_with_psr(state->base.dev, encoder,
> > - crtc_state-
> > >uapi.encoder_mask) {
> > + old_crtc_state-
> > >uapi.encoder_mask) {
>
> I would add comment here explaining why using encoder mask from
> old_crtc_state, but using new_crtc_state inside the loop. It's up to
> you:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
>
> > struct intel_dp *intel_dp = enc_to_intel_dp(encoder);
> > struct intel_psr *psr = &intel_dp->psr;
> > bool needs_to_disable = false;
> > @@ -1884,10 +1886,10 @@ void intel_psr_pre_plane_update(struct
> > intel_atomic_state *state,
> > * - All planes will go inactive
> > * - Changing between PSR versions
> > */
> > - needs_to_disable |=
> > intel_crtc_needs_modeset(crtc_state);
> > - needs_to_disable |= !crtc_state->has_psr;
> > - needs_to_disable |= !crtc_state->active_planes;
> > - needs_to_disable |= crtc_state->has_psr2 != psr-
> > >psr2_enabled;
> > + needs_to_disable |=
> > intel_crtc_needs_modeset(new_crtc_state);
> > + needs_to_disable |= !new_crtc_state->has_psr;
> > + needs_to_disable |= !new_crtc_state->active_planes;
> > + needs_to_disable |= new_crtc_state->has_psr2 != psr-
> > >psr2_enabled;
> >
> > if (psr->enabled && needs_to_disable)
> > intel_psr_disable_locked(intel_dp);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-15 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-14 15:07 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" José Roberto de Souza
2022-07-14 15:07 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/psr: Disable PSR before disable pipe José Roberto de Souza
2022-07-15 5:33 ` Hogander, Jouni
2022-07-15 8:39 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav [this message]
2022-07-15 13:35 ` Souza, Jose
2022-07-14 15:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for series starting with [1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" Patchwork
2022-07-14 18:55 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" (rev2) Patchwork
2022-07-15 1:15 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-07-15 5:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] Revert "drm/i915/display: Ensure PSR gets disabled if no encoders in new state" Hogander, Jouni
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=YtEnq9fpkVAEohbQ@intel.com \
--to=stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jouni.hogander@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