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: [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Extract code required to calculate max qgv/psf gv point
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:23:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zae4sLxA0QV/z68I@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zae2MYYnpOoRh2rC@intel.com>

On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 01:12:49PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 12:12:18PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 07:35:24PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:37:53AM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > > > We need that in order to force disable SAGV in next patch.
> > > > Also it is beneficial to separate that code, as in majority cases,
> > > > when SAGV is enabled, we don't even need those calculations.
> > > > Also we probably need to determine max PSF GV point as well, however
> > > > currently we don't do that when we disable SAGV, which might be
> > > > actually causing some issues in that case.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > >  1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c
> > > > index 583cd2ebdf89..efd408e96e8a 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c
> > > > @@ -805,6 +805,64 @@ intel_atomic_get_bw_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > >  	return to_intel_bw_state(bw_state);
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > +static unsigned int icl_max_bw_qgv_point(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > > > +					 int num_active_planes)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	unsigned int max_bw_point = 0;
> > > > +	unsigned int max_bw = 0;
> > > > +	unsigned int num_qgv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_qgv_points;
> > > > +	int i;
> > > > +
> > > > +	for (i = 0; i < num_qgv_points; i++) {
> > > > +		unsigned int idx;
> > > > +		unsigned int max_data_rate;
> > > > +
> > > > +		if (DISPLAY_VER(i915) > 11)
> > > > +			idx = tgl_max_bw_index(i915, num_active_planes, i);
> > > > +		else
> > > > +			idx = icl_max_bw_index(i915, num_active_planes, i);
> > > > +
> > > > +		if (idx >= ARRAY_SIZE(i915->display.bw.max))
> > > > +			continue;
> > > > +
> > > > +		max_data_rate = i915->display.bw.max[idx].deratedbw[i];
> > > 
> > > Looks like that that part could be extracted to a helper
> > > to be used by both codepaths (would be a natural counterpart
> > > to adl_psf_bw()).
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +		/*
> > > > +		 * We need to know which qgv point gives us
> > > > +		 * maximum bandwidth in order to disable SAGV
> > > > +		 * if we find that we exceed SAGV block time
> > > > +		 * with watermarks. By that moment we already
> > > > +		 * have those, as it is calculated earlier in
> > > > +		 * intel_atomic_check,
> > > > +		 */
> > > > +		if (max_data_rate > max_bw) {
> > > > +			max_bw_point = i;
> > > > +			max_bw = max_data_rate;
> > > > +		}
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > > > +	return max_bw_point;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +unsigned int icl_max_bw_psf_gv_point(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	unsigned int num_psf_gv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_psf_gv_points;
> > > > +	unsigned int max_bw = 0;
> > > > +	unsigned int max_bw_point = 0;
> > > > +	int i;
> > > > +
> > > > +	for (i = 0; i < num_psf_gv_points; i++) {
> > > > +		unsigned int max_data_rate = adl_psf_bw(i915, i);
> > > > +
> > > > +		if (max_data_rate > max_bw) {
> > > > +			max_bw_point = i;
> > > > +			max_bw = max_data_rate;
> > > > +		}
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > > > +	return max_bw_point;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > >  static int mtl_find_qgv_points(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > > >  			       unsigned int data_rate,
> > > >  			       unsigned int num_active_planes,
> > > > @@ -882,8 +940,6 @@ static int icl_find_qgv_points(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > > >  			       const struct intel_bw_state *old_bw_state,
> > > >  			       struct intel_bw_state *new_bw_state)
> > > >  {
> > > > -	unsigned int max_bw_point = 0;
> > > > -	unsigned int max_bw = 0;
> > > >  	unsigned int num_psf_gv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_psf_gv_points;
> > > >  	unsigned int num_qgv_points = i915->display.bw.max[0].num_qgv_points;
> > > >  	u16 psf_points = 0;
> > > > @@ -909,18 +965,6 @@ static int icl_find_qgv_points(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > > >  
> > > >  		max_data_rate = i915->display.bw.max[idx].deratedbw[i];
> > > >  
> > > > -		/*
> > > > -		 * We need to know which qgv point gives us
> > > > -		 * maximum bandwidth in order to disable SAGV
> > > > -		 * if we find that we exceed SAGV block time
> > > > -		 * with watermarks. By that moment we already
> > > > -		 * have those, as it is calculated earlier in
> > > > -		 * intel_atomic_check,
> > > > -		 */
> > > > -		if (max_data_rate > max_bw) {
> > > > -			max_bw_point = i;
> > > > -			max_bw = max_data_rate;
> > > > -		}
> > > >  		if (max_data_rate >= data_rate)
> > > >  			qgv_points |= BIT(i);
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -964,9 +1008,13 @@ static int icl_find_qgv_points(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > > >  	 * cause.
> > > >  	 */
> > > >  	if (!intel_can_enable_sagv(i915, new_bw_state)) {
> > > > -		qgv_points = BIT(max_bw_point);
> > > > -		drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "No SAGV, using single QGV point %d\n",
> > > > -			    max_bw_point);
> > > > +		unsigned int max_bw_qgv_point = icl_max_bw_qgv_point(i915, num_active_planes);
> > > > +		unsigned int max_bw_psf_gv_point = icl_max_bw_psf_gv_point(i915);
> > > > +
> > > > +		qgv_points = BIT(max_bw_qgv_point);
> > > > +		psf_points = BIT(max_bw_psf_gv_point);
> > > 
> > > We didn't restrict the PSF here previously.
> > 
> > Yep, but I really suspect we should. BSpec states that we should restrict all the GV points
> > except highest one, also that some PSF GV points aren't same or usable, depending on BW reqs.
> > So I would restrict that as well, in case if SAGV is off, just to be on safe side.
> 
> Pretty sure it's explicitly noted that PSF doesn't cause issues with
> latency and hence doesn't need this.
> 
> In any case, a change like this has no business being in a patch
> that's just supposed to refactor code.

Ok, lets drop this, until clarified.

Stan

> 
> -- 
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-17 11:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-28  8:37 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/3] QGV/SAGV related fixes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2023-11-28  8:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Add meaningful traces for QGV point info error handling Stanislav Lisovskiy
2023-11-28 12:53   ` Gustavo Sousa
2023-11-28  8:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Extract code required to calculate max qgv/psf gv point Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-01-12 17:35   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-01-17 10:12     ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2024-01-17 11:12       ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-01-17 11:23         ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav [this message]
2023-11-28  8:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Disable SAGV on bw init, to force QGV point recalculation Stanislav Lisovskiy
2023-11-29  9:21   ` Stanislav Lisovskiy
2023-12-01 14:35     ` Stanislav Lisovskiy
2023-11-28  9:20 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for QGV/SAGV related fixes Patchwork
2023-11-28  9:20 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-11-28  9:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-11-29 14:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for QGV/SAGV related fixes (rev2) Patchwork
2023-11-29 14:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-11-29 14:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-12-02  1:26 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for QGV/SAGV related fixes (rev3) Patchwork
2023-12-02  1:47 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-01-17 15:57 [PATCH 0/3] QGV/SAGV related fixes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-01-17 15:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Extract code required to calculate max qgv/psf gv point Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-01-18  8:24   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-02-19  9:18 [PATCH 0/3] QGV/SAGV related fixes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-02-19  9:18 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Extract code required to calculate max qgv/psf gv point Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-02-20  9:31 [PATCH 0/3] QGV/SAGV related fixes Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-02-20  9:31 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915: Extract code required to calculate max qgv/psf gv point Stanislav Lisovskiy
2024-03-20 22:07   ` Govindapillai, Vinod

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=Zae4sLxA0QV/z68I@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