From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Xiao Lu <xiaolu.xie@intel.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com, rodrigo.vivi@intel.com,
tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com, Xiao Lu <xiaolu.xie@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: fix PBN in ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD request to use actual video bandwidth
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:04:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ebfe85875a9d47151426913de39e49159498be8e@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260922081258.1995510-1-xiaolu.xie@intel.com>
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026, Xiao Lu <xiaolu.xie@intel.com> wrote:
> When computing the number of time slots for an MST stream,
> intel_dp_mtp_tu_compute_config() was passing the TU-aligned PBN value
> to drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots() instead of the actual video
> bandwidth PBN.
>
> The aligned PBN is computed by rounding up the raw video bandwidth to
> the nearest TU boundary and aligning to the hardware TU granularity
> (4 / lane_count). This inflated PBN is then used as the requested PBN
> in the ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD sideband message, causing the MST core's
> bandwidth check in drm_dp_mst_atomic_check_port_bw_limit() to
> incorrectly reject configurations that should fit within the available
> link bandwidth.
>
> Per DP v2.1b Section 2.6.4.1, the PBN in an ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD request
> represents the video stream bandwidth and is independent of the source
> TX link rate. The same video stream should result in the same PBN value
> regardless of the link rate used on the source side. Passing the
> TU-aligned PBN violates this requirement, as it incorporates link-rate-
> specific TU granularity into the payload bandwidth value.
>
> This was observed in a 3-display MST daisy-chain topology (PS8650 MST
> hub → ViewSonic VP2468 × 2 → Lenovo Pro 27UD-10) where switching
> Lenovo to 4K@60Hz failed with -ENOSPC despite the actual video
> bandwidth fitting within the DFP link capacity. The inflated PBN of
> the VP2468 streams (537 instead of the correct 532 for 1920x1080@60Hz)
> consumed excess slots, leaving insufficient room for the 4K@60Hz stream.
>
> Fix this by separating raw_pbn (the actual video bandwidth used for
> payload allocation and ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD) from the aligned pbn (used
> only for TU hardware programming). Pass raw_pbn to
> drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots() so that bandwidth accounting in the
> MST core reflects the true stream requirements.
>
> Depends-on: <20260908132844.2309047-1-xiaolu.xie@intel.com>
> ("drm/dp/mst: track allocated_pbn from ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD reply")
This is not a thing. If you have multiple patches with dependencies,
please send them together.
BR,
Jani.
>
> The companion patch above tracks the allocated_pbn returned in the
> ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD reply from the branch device. Together with this fix,
> the correct raw_pbn is used as the requested PBN in the
> ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD request, and the allocated_pbn from the reply is used
> for bandwidth limit checks. This pairing ensures that both the request
> and the check accurately reflect the actual video stream bandwidth
> and any per-hop capacity constraints along the MST path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Lu <xiaolu.xie@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c | 33 +++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> index 0c362784a..31e846aad 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> @@ -350,6 +350,7 @@ int intel_dp_mtp_tu_compute_config(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> if (is_mst) {
> int remote_bw_overhead;
> int remote_tu;
> + int raw_pbn;
> fixed20_12 pbn;
>
> remote_bw_overhead = intel_dp_mst_bw_overhead(crtc_state,
> @@ -369,9 +370,10 @@ int intel_dp_mtp_tu_compute_config(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> * crtc_state->dp_m_n.tu), provided that the driver doesn't
> * enable SSC on the corresponding link.
> */
> - pbn.full = dfixed_const(intel_dp_mst_calc_pbn(adjusted_mode->crtc_clock,
> - link_bpp_x16,
> - remote_bw_overhead));
> + raw_pbn = intel_dp_mst_calc_pbn(adjusted_mode->crtc_clock,
> + link_bpp_x16,
> + remote_bw_overhead);
> + pbn.full = dfixed_const(raw_pbn);
> remote_tu = DIV_ROUND_UP(pbn.full, mst_state->pbn_div.full);
>
> /*
> @@ -384,11 +386,10 @@ int intel_dp_mtp_tu_compute_config(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> remote_tu = ALIGN(remote_tu, 4 / crtc_state->lane_count);
>
> /*
> - * Also align PBNs accordingly, since MST core will derive its
> - * own copy of TU from the PBN in drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots().
> - * The above comment about the difference between the PBN
> - * allocated for the whole path and the TUs allocated for the
> - * first branch device's link also applies here.
> + * Keep the PBN corresponding to the aligned hardware TU separate
> + * from raw_pbn. The aligned value describes the TU granularity of
> + * the first downstream branch link; raw_pbn is the video bandwidth
> + * value passed to the MST payload allocator and ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD.
> */
> pbn.full = remote_tu * mst_state->pbn_div.full;
>
> @@ -397,7 +398,21 @@ int intel_dp_mtp_tu_compute_config(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>
> slots = drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots(state, &intel_dp->mst.mgr,
> connector->mst.port,
> - dfixed_trunc(pbn));
> + raw_pbn);
> +
> + drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> + "MST TU %s pipe %c: clock=%d lanes=%d bpp=%d link_bpp=%d fec=%d\n",
> + connector->base.name,
> + pipe_name(to_intel_crtc(crtc_state->uapi.crtc)->pipe),
> + crtc_state->port_clock, crtc_state->lane_count,
> + fxp_q4_to_int(bpp_x16), fxp_q4_to_int(link_bpp_x16),
> + crtc_state->fec_enable);
> + drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> + "MST TU %s: overhead=%d raw_pbn=%d pbn=%d pbn_div=%d tu=%d slots=%d full_pbn=%d\n",
> + connector->base.name,
> + remote_bw_overhead, raw_pbn,
> + dfixed_trunc(pbn), dfixed_trunc(mst_state->pbn_div),
> + remote_tu, slots, connector->mst.port->full_pbn);
>
> /* TODO: Check this already in drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots(). */
> if (slots > mst_state->total_avail_slots)
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-22 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-22 8:12 [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: fix PBN in ALLOCATE_PAYLOAD request to use actual video bandwidth Xiao Lu
2026-09-22 8:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-22 9:04 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2026-09-22 12:15 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2026-09-22 22:10 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
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=ebfe85875a9d47151426913de39e49159498be8e@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=xiaolu.xie@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