Re: [PATCH v6 6/7] drm/i915/scaler: Check if vblank is sufficient for scaler

["Nautiyal, Ankit K" <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>]

On 1/16/2025 10:01 PM, Mitul Golani wrote:
> High refresh rate panels which may have small line times
> and vblank sizes, Check if vblank size is sufficient for
> enabled scaler users.
>
> --v2:
> - Use hweight* family of functions for counting bits. [Jani]
> - Update precision handling for hscale and vscale. [Ankit]
> - Consider chroma downscaling factor during latency
> calculation. [Ankit]
> - Replace function name from scaler_prefill_time to
> scaler_prefill_latency.
>
> --v3:
> - hscale_k and vscale_k values are already left shifted
> by 16, after multiplying by 1000, those need to be right
> shifted to 16. [Ankit]
> - Replace YCBCR444 to YCBCR420. [Ankit]
> - Divide by 1000 * 1000 in end to get correct precision. [Ankit]
> - Initialise latency to 0 to avoid any garbage.
>
> --v4:
> - Elaborate commit message and add Bspec number. [Ankit]
> - Improvise latency calculation. [Ankit]
> - Use ceiling value for down scaling factor when less than 1
> as per bspec. [Ankit]
> - Correct linetime calculation. [Ankit]
> - Consider cdclk prefill adjustment while prefill
> computation.[Ankit]
>
> --v5:
> - Add Bspec link in commit message trailer. [Ankit]
> - Correct hscale, vscale data type.
> - Use intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk. [Ankit]
>
> Bspec: 70151
No need to leave a line here. This is part of the trailer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mitul Golani <mitulkumar.ajitkumar.golani@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> index f4458d1185b3..792e59685578 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> @@ -2292,6 +2292,38 @@ static int icl_build_plane_wm(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> +static int
> +scaler_prefill_latency(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> +{
> +	const struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_state =
> +					&crtc_state->scaler_state;
> +	int num_scaler_users = hweight32(scaler_state->scaler_users);
> +	int latency = 0;
> +	int linetime =
> +		intel_usecs_to_scanlines(&crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode,
> +					 DIV_ROUND_UP(1000 * crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode.htotal,
> +						      crtc_state->pixel_rate));
> +	u64 hscale_k, vscale_k;
> +
> +	if (!num_scaler_users)
> +		return latency;
> +
> +	latency = intel_usecs_to_scanlines(&crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode, 4 * linetime);
> +
> +	if (num_scaler_users > 1) {
> +		int chroma_downscaling_factor =
> +			crtc_state->output_format == INTEL_OUTPUT_FORMAT_YCBCR420 ? 2 : 1;
> +		hscale_k = max(1000, mul_u32_u32(scaler_state->scalers[0].hscale, 1000) >> 16);
> +		vscale_k = max(1000, mul_u32_u32(scaler_state->scalers[0].vscale, 1000) >> 16);
> +
> +		latency += chroma_downscaling_factor *
> +			   DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL((4 * linetime * hscale_k * vscale_k),
> +					    1000000);
> +	}
> +
> +	return latency * intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk(crtc_state);

On second reading of the Bspec it seems that the 
cdclk_state->logical.cdclk was correct.

Apologies for the mistake. You can revert this to the previous version.


Regards,

Ankit

> +}
> +
>   static bool
>   skl_is_vblank_too_short(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
>   			int wm0_lines, int latency)
> @@ -2302,6 +2334,7 @@ skl_is_vblank_too_short(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
>   	/* FIXME missing scaler and DSC pre-fill time */
>   	return crtc_state->framestart_delay +
>   		intel_usecs_to_scanlines(adjusted_mode, latency) +
> +		scaler_prefill_latency(crtc_state) +
>   		wm0_lines >
>   		adjusted_mode->crtc_vtotal - adjusted_mode->crtc_vblank_start;
>   }