Bin, KH,
Thanks for the confirmation!
Hamza,
I think you can add a Tested-by tag for Bin too.
On 12/7/2023 04:38, Bin Li wrote:
Hi Mario,
It's a false alarm from my side, after testing the 6.1.0-oem and
6.5.0-oem kernels, this patch works perfectly fine, sorry about that.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 3:47 PM Bin Li <binli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Mario,
I found I missed the part in drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c with kai.heng's review.
I will rebuild a new kernel and test it again, and reply later, sorry about that.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:58 PM Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:10 AM Mario Limonciello
<mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/6/2023 20:07, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 9:57 AM Mario Limonciello
<mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/6/2023 19:23, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 4:29 AM Mario Limonciello
<mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/5/2023 14:17, Hamza Mahfooz wrote:
We currently don't support dirty rectangles on hardware rotated modes.
So, if a user is using hardware rotated modes with PSR-SU enabled,
use PSR-SU FFU for all rotated planes (including cursor planes).
Here is the email for the original reporter to give an attribution tag.
Reported-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
For this particular issue,
Tested-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Can you confirm what kernel base you tested issue against?
I ask because Bin Li (+CC) also tested it against 6.1 based LTS kernel
but ran into problems.
The patch was tested against ADSN.
I wonder if it's because of other dependency patches. If that's the
case it would be good to call them out in the Cc: @stable as
dependencies so when Greg or Sasha backport this 6.1 doesn't get broken.
Probably. I haven't really tested any older kernel series.
Since you've got a good environment to test it and reproduce it would
you mind double checking it against 6.7-rc, 6.5 and 6.1 trees? If we
don't have confidence it works on the older trees I think we'll need to
drop the stable tag.
Not seeing issues here when the patch is applied against 6.5 and 6.1
(which needs to resolve a minor conflict).
I am not sure what happened for Bin's case.
Kai-Heng
Kai-Heng
Bin,
Could you run ./scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh on your kernel trace to
give us a specific line number on the issue you hit?
Thanks!
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2952
Fixes: 30ebe41582d1 ("drm/amd/display: add FB_DAMAGE_CLIPS support")
Signed-off-by: Hamza Mahfooz <hamza.mahfooz@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c | 4 ++++
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dc_hw_types.h | 1 +
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn20/dcn20_hubp.c | 12 ++++++++++--
.../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c | 3 ++-
4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
index c146dc9cba92..79f8102d2601 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
@@ -5208,6 +5208,7 @@ static void fill_dc_dirty_rects(struct drm_plane *plane,
bool bb_changed;
bool fb_changed;
u32 i = 0;
+
Looks like a spurious newline here.
*dirty_regions_changed = false;
/*
@@ -5217,6 +5218,9 @@ static void fill_dc_dirty_rects(struct drm_plane *plane,
if (plane->type == DRM_PLANE_TYPE_CURSOR)
return;
+ if (new_plane_state->rotation != DRM_MODE_ROTATE_0)
+ goto ffu;
+
I noticed that the original report was specifically on 180°. Since
you're also covering 90° and 270° with this check it sounds like it's
actually problematic on those too?
90 & 270 are problematic too. But from what I observed the issue is
much more than just cursors.
Got it; thanks.
Kai-Heng
num_clips = drm_plane_get_damage_clips_count(new_plane_state);
clips = drm_plane_get_damage_clips(new_plane_state);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dc_hw_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dc_hw_types.h
index 9649934ea186..e2a3aa8812df 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dc_hw_types.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dc_hw_types.h
@@ -465,6 +465,7 @@ struct dc_cursor_mi_param {
struct fixed31_32 v_scale_ratio;
enum dc_rotation_angle rotation;
bool mirror;
+ struct dc_stream_state *stream;
};
/* IPP related types */
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn20/dcn20_hubp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn20/dcn20_hubp.c
index 139cf31d2e45..89c3bf0fe0c9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn20/dcn20_hubp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn20/dcn20_hubp.c
@@ -1077,8 +1077,16 @@ void hubp2_cursor_set_position(
if (src_y_offset < 0)
src_y_offset = 0;
/* Save necessary cursor info x, y position. w, h is saved in attribute func. */
- hubp->cur_rect.x = src_x_offset + param->viewport.x;
- hubp->cur_rect.y = src_y_offset + param->viewport.y;
+ if (param->stream->link->psr_settings.psr_version >= DC_PSR_VERSION_SU_1 &&
+ param->rotation != ROTATION_ANGLE_0) {
Ditto on above about 90° and 270°.
+ hubp->cur_rect.x = 0;
+ hubp->cur_rect.y = 0;
+ hubp->cur_rect.w = param->stream->timing.h_addressable;
+ hubp->cur_rect.h = param->stream->timing.v_addressable;
+ } else {
+ hubp->cur_rect.x = src_x_offset + param->viewport.x;
+ hubp->cur_rect.y = src_y_offset + param->viewport.y;
+ }
}
void hubp2_clk_cntl(struct hubp *hubp, bool enable)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c
index 2b8b8366538e..ce5613a76267 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn10/dcn10_hwseq.c
@@ -3417,7 +3417,8 @@ void dcn10_set_cursor_position(struct pipe_ctx *pipe_ctx)
.h_scale_ratio = pipe_ctx->plane_res.scl_data.ratios.horz,
.v_scale_ratio = pipe_ctx->plane_res.scl_data.ratios.vert,
.rotation = pipe_ctx->plane_state->rotation,
- .mirror = pipe_ctx->plane_state->horizontal_mirror
+ .mirror = pipe_ctx->plane_state->horizontal_mirror,
+ .stream = pipe_ctx->stream
As a nit; I think it's worth leaving a harmless trailing ',' so that
there is less ping pong in the future when adding new members to a struct.
};
bool pipe_split_on = false;
bool odm_combine_on = (pipe_ctx->next_odm_pipe != NULL) ||
