Re: [PATCH 9/9] drm/i915/wm: Include .min_ddb_alloc_uv in the wm dumps

Jani Nikula
2026-03-19T14:01:50Z

On Thu, 19 Mar 2026, Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> We include the Y/RGB .min_ddb_alloc in the wm state change dumps.
> Do the same for .min_ddb_alloc_uv, on the platforms where it is
> used.
>
> Also adjust the whitespace in the other debug prints to keep
> the values for each wm level lined up across all the lines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> index 345767349988..4725927acfd4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> @@ -2624,7 +2624,7 @@ skl_print_plane_wm_changes(struct intel_plane *plane,
> struct intel_display *display = to_intel_display(plane);
>
> drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> - "[PLANE:%d:%s] level %cwm0,%cwm1,%cwm2,%cwm3,%cwm4,%cwm5,%cwm6,%cwm7,%ctwm,%cswm,%cstwm"
> + "[PLANE:%d:%s] level %cwm0,%cwm1,%cwm2,%cwm3,%cwm4,%cwm5,%cwm6,%cwm7,%ctwm,%cswm,%cstwm"
> " -> %cwm0,%cwm1,%cwm2,%cwm3,%cwm4,%cwm5,%cwm6,%cwm7,%ctwm,%cswm,%cstwm\n",
> plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name,
> enast(old_wm->wm[0].enable), enast(old_wm->wm[1].enable),
> @@ -2643,7 +2643,7 @@ skl_print_plane_wm_changes(struct intel_plane *plane,
> enast(new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.enable));
>
> drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> - "[PLANE:%d:%s] lines %c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%4d"
> + "[PLANE:%d:%s] lines %c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%4d"
> " -> %c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%3d,%c%4d\n",
> plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name,
> enast(old_wm->wm[0].ignore_lines), old_wm->wm[0].lines,
> @@ -2670,7 +2670,7 @@ skl_print_plane_wm_changes(struct intel_plane *plane,
> enast(new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.ignore_lines), new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.lines);
>
> drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> - "[PLANE:%d:%s] blocks %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d"
> + "[PLANE:%d:%s] blocks %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d"
> " -> %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d\n",
> plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name,
> old_wm->wm[0].blocks, old_wm->wm[1].blocks,
> @@ -2689,7 +2689,7 @@ skl_print_plane_wm_changes(struct intel_plane *plane,
> new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.blocks);
>
> drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> - "[PLANE:%d:%s] min_ddb %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d"
> + "[PLANE:%d:%s] min_ddb %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d"

I wonder if the space changes would've been cleared with something like:

"[PLANE:%d:%s] min_ddb: %4d...

but *shrug*.

Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>

> " -> %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d\n",
> plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name,
> old_wm->wm[0].min_ddb_alloc, old_wm->wm[1].min_ddb_alloc,
> @@ -2706,6 +2706,28 @@ skl_print_plane_wm_changes(struct intel_plane *plane,
> new_wm->trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc,
> new_wm->sagv.wm0.min_ddb_alloc,
> new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc);
> +
> + if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 11)
> + return;
> +
> + drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> + "[PLANE:%d:%s] min_ddb_uv %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d"
> + " -> %4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%4d,%5d\n",
> + plane->base.base.id, plane->base.name,
> + old_wm->wm[0].min_ddb_alloc_uv, old_wm->wm[1].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->wm[2].min_ddb_alloc_uv, old_wm->wm[3].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->wm[4].min_ddb_alloc_uv, old_wm->wm[5].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->wm[6].min_ddb_alloc_uv, old_wm->wm[7].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->sagv.wm0.min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + old_wm->sagv.trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->wm[0].min_ddb_alloc_uv, new_wm->wm[1].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->wm[2].min_ddb_alloc_uv, new_wm->wm[3].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->wm[4].min_ddb_alloc_uv, new_wm->wm[5].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->wm[6].min_ddb_alloc_uv, new_wm->wm[7].min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->sagv.wm0.min_ddb_alloc_uv,
> + new_wm->sagv.trans_wm.min_ddb_alloc_uv);
> }
>
> static void

--
Jani Nikula, Intel