From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1033DEB8FAF for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 10:46:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456D010E5F7; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 10:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1002710E068; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 10:45:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1693997156; x=1725533156; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=XFjfWVIGOsRUSJoGY/5+OBZAPnOQ77Mcexik12PbyyQ=; b=FeRvgw+Qvfqajl0KWTGRcyQv6Srl3VhYVrmPLtWGzGzcjfPojtenL1CU dF8P5lVjJ3PZlTPnIoh4kCab0OpX/inzWuwsnhRihofhiqtI3IwmnhAbV YKDQzHEburPFD3tH9M/GnE8fTWAKGTZRspX5rlzUtQ25hcMHkXHnMfHFQ gk15YuDfeWcSoQc18w/y5c38kGx8jZLWIA92wAPkw2UuCDXTzpltqQuZE g0lVhCEBYPNrj2om62sM9ikMM6V5dX+eKTaMCqUB9zb7tk02uh9ongc/V MHbG0YGwn+wUCyG1nHrgRjDpbTQlAa6OijOf0X8djdxSW0zBWWSbWD1pI A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10824"; a="367253380" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.02,231,1688454000"; d="scan'208";a="367253380" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Sep 2023 03:45:55 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10824"; a="806959150" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.02,231,1688454000"; d="scan'208";a="806959150" Received: from stinkpipe.fi.intel.com (HELO stinkbox) ([10.237.72.153]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 06 Sep 2023 03:45:52 -0700 Received: by stinkbox (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 06 Sep 2023 13:45:51 +0300 Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 13:45:51 +0300 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: Imre Deak Message-ID: References: <20230824080517.693621-1-imre.deak@intel.com> <20230824080517.693621-10-imre.deak@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Patchwork-Hint: comment Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 09/22] drm/dp_mst: Fix fractional bpp scaling in drm_dp_calc_pbn_mode() X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 01:22:27PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 05:53:11AM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:05:04AM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > > > For fractional bpp values passed to the function in a .4 fixed point > > > format, the fractional part is currently ignored due to scaling bpp too > > > early. Fix this by scaling the overhead factor instead and to avoid an > > > overflow multiplying bpp with the overhead factor instead of the clock > > > rate. > > > > > > While at it simplify the formula, and pass the expected fixed point bpp > > > values in the kunit tests. > > > > > > Cc: Lyude Paul > > > Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dp_mst_topology.c | 7 ++----- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_dp_mst_helper_test.c | 8 ++++---- > > > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > > > index ed96cfcfa3040..bd0f35a0ea5fb 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > > > @@ -4712,12 +4712,9 @@ int drm_dp_calc_pbn_mode(int clock, int bpp, bool dsc) > > > * factor in the numerator rather than the denominator to avoid > > > * integer overflow > > > */ > > > + u32 bpp_m = (dsc ? 64 / 16 : 64) * 1006 * bpp; > > > > > > - if (dsc) > > > - return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(mul_u32_u32(clock * (bpp / 16), 64 * 1006), > > > - 8 * 54 * 1000 * 1000); > > > - > > > - return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(mul_u32_u32(clock * bpp, 64 * 1006), > > > + return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(mul_u32_u32(clock, bpp_m), > > > 8 * 54 * 1000 * 1000); > > > > I thought I sorted out this mess already... > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/535005/?series=117201&rev=3 > > Apparently I forgot to push that. > > Looks ok, can use that instead. I thought clock * bpp could overflow, > but probably not in practice. 2^32/(16*3*2^4)~=5.6e6 -> 5.6 GHz dotclock. So should be good for a few more years. But we can of course move bpp to the other side of the mul_u32_u32() as you do here and then we don't have anything to worry about as everything else there is constant. > > The test cases below would still need to be fixed. I thought I fixed the tests as well? Maybe they changed... > > > > > > } > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dp_calc_pbn_mode); > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_dp_mst_helper_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_dp_mst_helper_test.c > > > index 545beea33e8c7..ea2182815ebe8 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_dp_mst_helper_test.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_dp_mst_helper_test.c > > > @@ -40,15 +40,15 @@ static const struct drm_dp_mst_calc_pbn_mode_test drm_dp_mst_calc_pbn_mode_cases > > > }, > > > { > > > .clock = 332880, > > > - .bpp = 24, > > > + .bpp = 24 << 4, > > > .dsc = true, > > > - .expected = 50 > > > + .expected = 1191 > > > }, > > > { > > > .clock = 324540, > > > - .bpp = 24, > > > + .bpp = 24 << 4, > > > .dsc = true, > > > - .expected = 49 > > > + .expected = 1161 > > > }, > > > }; > > > > > > -- > > > 2.37.2 > > > > -- > > Ville Syrjälä > > Intel -- Ville Syrjälä Intel