Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, suraj.kandpal@intel.com,
	jani.saarinen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/19] drm/i915: Add new abstraction layer to handle pipe order for different joiners
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 01:38:20 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZuIb3D1GrjwFBIuU@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240911131349.933814-17-ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 06:43:46PM +0530, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
> From: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> 
> Ultrajoiner case requires special treatment where both reverse and
> staight order iteration doesn't work(for instance disabling case requires
> order to be: primary master, slaves, secondary master).
> 
> Lets unify our approach by using not only pipe masks for iterating required
> pipes based on joiner type used, but also using different "priority" arrays
> for each of those.
> 
> v2: Fix checkpatch warnings. (Ankit)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c     | 19 +++--
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h |  7 ++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c  | 18 +++--
>  4 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> index 00fbe9f8c03a..2c064b6c6d01 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> @@ -3116,10 +3116,11 @@ static void intel_ddi_post_disable_hdmi_or_sst(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  					       const struct drm_connector_state *old_conn_state)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(encoder->base.dev);
> -	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc;
> +	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc; enum pipe pipe;
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -					 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(dev_priv, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_disable(old_crtc_state)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *old_pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> @@ -3130,8 +3131,9 @@ static void intel_ddi_post_disable_hdmi_or_sst(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  
>  	intel_ddi_disable_transcoder_func(old_crtc_state);
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -					 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(dev_priv, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_disable(old_crtc_state)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *old_pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> @@ -3383,7 +3385,7 @@ static void intel_enable_ddi(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  			     const struct drm_connector_state *conn_state)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(encoder->base.dev);
> -	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc;
> +	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc; enum pipe pipe;
>  
>  	intel_ddi_enable_transcoder_func(encoder, crtc_state);
>  
> @@ -3394,8 +3396,9 @@ static void intel_enable_ddi(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  
>  	intel_ddi_wait_for_fec_status(encoder, crtc_state, true);
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask_reverse(&i915->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -						 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(crtc_state)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(i915, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(crtc_state),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_enable(crtc_state)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index db27850b2c36..27622d51a473 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -1737,6 +1737,50 @@ static void hsw_configure_cpu_transcoder(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_sta
>  	hsw_set_transconf(crtc_state);
>  }
>  
> +static
> +bool intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner(const struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config)
> +{
> +	return hweight8(pipe_config->joiner_pipes) == 2;
> +}
> +
> +const enum pipe *intel_get_pipe_order_enable(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> +{
> +	static const enum pipe ultrajoiner_pipe_order_enable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_B, PIPE_D, PIPE_C, PIPE_A
> +	};
> +	static const enum pipe bigjoiner_pipe_order_enable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_B, PIPE_A, PIPE_D, PIPE_C
> +	};
> +	static const enum pipe nojoiner_pipe_order_enable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_A, PIPE_B, PIPE_C, PIPE_D
> +	};
> +
> +	if (intel_crtc_is_ultrajoiner(crtc_state))
> +		return ultrajoiner_pipe_order_enable;
> +	else if (intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner(crtc_state))
> +		return bigjoiner_pipe_order_enable;
> +	return nojoiner_pipe_order_enable;
> +}
> +
> +const enum pipe *intel_get_pipe_order_disable(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> +{
> +	static const enum pipe ultrajoiner_pipe_order_disable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_A, PIPE_B, PIPE_D, PIPE_C
> +	};
> +	static const enum pipe bigjoiner_pipe_order_disable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_A, PIPE_B, PIPE_C, PIPE_D
> +	};
> +	static const enum pipe nojoiner_pipe_order_disable[I915_MAX_PIPES] = {
> +		PIPE_A, PIPE_B, PIPE_C, PIPE_D
> +	};
> +
> +	if (intel_crtc_is_ultrajoiner(crtc_state))
> +		return ultrajoiner_pipe_order_disable;
> +	else if (intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner(crtc_state))
> +		return bigjoiner_pipe_order_disable;
> +	return nojoiner_pipe_order_disable;

I don't think we should need all those diffrent order array. Technically
one should do. Though having two might make sense.

Another problem is the hardcoded pipes. If we eg. get hardware that
would support ultrajoiner on pipes B-E in the future this would no
longer  work.

> +}
<snip>
> +#define for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(__dev_priv, intel_crtc, __p, __mask, __priolist) \
> +	for_each_pipe(__dev_priv, __p) \
> +		for_each_if((__mask) & BIT(__priolist[__p])) \
> +			for_each_if(intel_crtc = intel_crtc_for_pipe(to_intel_display(&__dev_priv->drm), __priolist[__p]))


I think something like:

const u8 intel_pipe_order_enable[4] = {
        3, 1, 2, 0,
};

const u8 intel_pipe_order_disable[4] = {
        0, 2, 1, 3,
};

#define for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask_ordered(crtc, pipe_masks, order, i) \
        for ((i) = 0; \
             (i) < ARRAY_SIZE(order) && \
             ((crtc) = intel_crtc_for_pipe(joiner_primary_pipe(pipe_mask) + (order)[(i)]), 1); \
             (i)++) \
                for_each_if((crtc) && (pipe_mask) & BIT((crtc)->pipe))

would let us avoid that hardcoded pipe stuff, and everything is
just based on the relative order between the pipes. The same orders
also work for bigjoiner and non-joined cases (it just skips the pipes
that are't in the mask).


The alternative would be to just use the bigjoiner primary+secondary masks
and come up with a a way to iterate two bitmask in either forward or reverse
order. Hmm, I suppose one might just combine the bigjoiner primary and
secondary masks into one, with one of them shifted up to some high bits,
and then iterate the combined bitmask either forward or backward.

Something like this should work:
#define for_each_crtc_in_masks(crtc, first_pipes, second_pipes, pipes, i) \
        for ((i) = 0, (pipes) = (second_pipes) << 16 | (first_pipes); \
             (i) < 32 && ((crtc) = intel_crtc_for_pipe((i) & 15), 1); \
             (i)++) \
                for_each_if((crtc) && (pipes) & BIT(i))

#define for_each_crtc_in_masks_reverse(crtc, first_pipes, second_pipes, pipes, i) \
        for ((i) = 31, (pipes) = (first_pipes) << 16 | (second_pipes); \
             (i) >= 0 && ((crtc) = intel_crtc_for_pipe((i) & 15), 1); \
             (i)--) \
                for_each_if((crtc) && (pipes) & BIT(i))

(could reduce the constants a bit given we don't have 16 pipes).

And then we'd just use them like so:
for_each_crtc_in_masks_reverse(crtc, bigjoiner_secondary_pipes(),
				bigjoiner_primary_pipes(), pipes, i)
	enable();

for_each_crtc_in_masks(crtc, bigjoiner_primary_pipes(),
			bigjoiner_secondary_pipes(), pipes, i)
	disable();

Would at least be very close to what we already have, just splitting
the pipe masks into two essentially.

> +
>  #define for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(dev, intel_crtc, pipe_mask)	\
>  	list_for_each_entry(intel_crtc,					\
>  			    &(dev)->mode_config.crtc_list,		\
> @@ -431,6 +436,8 @@ bool intel_crtc_is_ultrajoiner(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>  bool intel_crtc_is_ultrajoiner_primary(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>  u8 intel_crtc_joiner_secondary_pipes(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>  struct intel_crtc *intel_primary_crtc(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
> +const enum pipe *intel_get_pipe_order_enable(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
> +const enum pipe *intel_get_pipe_order_disable(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>  bool intel_crtc_get_pipe_config(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>  bool intel_pipe_config_compare(const struct intel_crtc_state *current_config,
>  			       const struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> index be79783ce09b..1c87f81568c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> @@ -1003,7 +1003,7 @@ static void intel_mst_post_disable_dp(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  	struct drm_dp_mst_atomic_payload *new_payload =
>  		drm_atomic_get_mst_payload_state(new_mst_state, connector->port);
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(connector->base.dev);
> -	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc;
> +	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc; enum pipe pipe;
>  	bool last_mst_stream;
>  
>  	intel_dp->active_mst_links--;
> @@ -1012,8 +1012,9 @@ static void intel_mst_post_disable_dp(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  		    DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 12 && last_mst_stream &&
>  		    !intel_dp_mst_is_master_trans(old_crtc_state));
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -					 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(dev_priv, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_disable(old_crtc_state)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *old_pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> @@ -1037,8 +1038,9 @@ static void intel_mst_post_disable_dp(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  
>  	intel_ddi_disable_transcoder_func(old_crtc_state);
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -					 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(dev_priv, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(old_crtc_state),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_disable(old_crtc_state)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *old_pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> @@ -1257,6 +1259,7 @@ static void intel_mst_enable_dp(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  	enum transcoder trans = pipe_config->cpu_transcoder;
>  	bool first_mst_stream = intel_dp->active_mst_links == 1;
>  	struct intel_crtc *pipe_crtc;
> +	enum pipe pipe;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_config->has_pch_encoder);
> @@ -1304,8 +1307,9 @@ static void intel_mst_enable_dp(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
>  
>  	intel_enable_transcoder(pipe_config);
>  
> -	for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask_reverse(&dev_priv->drm, pipe_crtc,
> -						 intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(pipe_config)) {
> +	for_each_intel_crtc_in_mask_priority(dev_priv, pipe_crtc, pipe,
> +					     intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(pipe_config),
> +					     intel_get_pipe_order_enable(pipe_config)) {
>  		const struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_crtc_state =
>  			intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, pipe_crtc);
>  
> -- 
> 2.45.2

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-11 22:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-11 13:13 [PATCH 00/19] Ultrajoiner basic functionality series Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 01/19] drm/i915/display: Check whether platform supports joiner Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 02/19] drm/i915/display: Modify debugfs for joiner to force n pipes Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 03/19] drm/i915/display_debugfs: Allow force joiner only if supported Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:00   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 20:11   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 04/19] drm/i915/dp: Add helper to compute num pipes joined Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:10   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 05/19] drm/i915/display: Add debugfs support to avoid joiner Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 06/19] drm/i915/display: Simplify intel_joiner_num_pipes and its usage Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:14   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-12 10:15     ` Nautiyal, Ankit K
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 07/19] drm/i915/display: Use joined pipes in intel_dp_joiner_needs_dsc Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:17   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-12 10:20     ` Nautiyal, Ankit K
2024-09-12 10:58       ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-12 11:04         ` Nautiyal, Ankit K
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 08/19] drm/i915/display: Use joined pipes in intel_mode_valid_max_plane_size Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 09/19] drm/i915/display: Use joined pipes in dsc helpers for slices, bpp Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 10/19] drm/i915: Add some essential functionality for joiners Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 11/19] drm/i915: Split current joiner hw state readout Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:28   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 12/19] drm/i915: Add bigjoiner and uncompressed joiner hw readout sanity checks Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 13/19] drm/i915: Implement hw state readout and checks for ultrajoiner Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:33   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 14/19] drm/i915/display: Percolate ultrajoiner info to get_joiner_config Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:45   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 15/19] drm/i915/display/vdsc: Add ultrajoiner support with DSC Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 20:48   ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 16/19] drm/i915: Add new abstraction layer to handle pipe order for different joiners Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 22:38   ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2024-09-16  7:39     ` Nautiyal, Ankit K
2024-09-16 14:54       ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-16 15:06         ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-17  9:22           ` Nautiyal, Ankit K
2024-09-17 12:14             ` Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 17/19] drm/i915: Compute config and mode valid changes for ultrajoiner Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 18/19] drm/i915/display: Consider ultrajoiner for computing maxdotclock Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 13:13 ` [PATCH 19/19] drm/i915/intel_dp: Add support for forcing ultrajoiner Ankit Nautiyal
2024-09-11 19:29 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Ultrajoiner basic functionality series (rev8) Patchwork
2024-09-11 23:05 ` [PATCH 00/19] Ultrajoiner basic functionality series Ville Syrjälä
2024-09-12 11:02   ` Nautiyal, Ankit K

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=ZuIb3D1GrjwFBIuU@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.saarinen@intel.com \
    --cc=suraj.kandpal@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