Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 08:26:49 -0800
> Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> >> > +static void vc4_plane_calc_load(struct drm_plane_state *state)
>> >> > +{
>> >> > + unsigned int hvs_load_shift, vrefresh, i;
>> >> > + struct drm_framebuffer *fb = state->fb;
>> >> > + struct vc4_plane_state *vc4_state;
>> >> > + struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state;
>> >> > + unsigned int vscale_factor;
>> >> > +
>> >> > + vc4_state = to_vc4_plane_state(state);
>> >> > + crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_existing_crtc_state(state->state,
>> >> > + state->crtc);
>> >> > + vrefresh = drm_mode_vrefresh(&crtc_state->adjusted_mode);
>> >> > +
>> >> > + /* The HVS is able to process 2 pixels/cycle when scaling the source,
>> >> > + * 4 pixels/cycle otherwise.
>> >> > + * Alpha blending step seems to be pipelined and it's always operating
>> >> > + * at 4 pixels/cycle, so the limiting aspect here seems to be the
>> >> > + * scaler block.
>> >> > + * HVS load is expressed in clk-cycles/sec (AKA Hz).
>> >> > + */
>> >> > + if (vc4_state->x_scaling[0] != VC4_SCALING_NONE ||
>> >> > + vc4_state->x_scaling[1] != VC4_SCALING_NONE ||
>> >> > + vc4_state->y_scaling[0] != VC4_SCALING_NONE ||
>> >> > + vc4_state->y_scaling[1] != VC4_SCALING_NONE)
>> >> > + hvs_load_shift = 1;
>> >> > + else
>> >> > + hvs_load_shift = 2;
>> >> > +
>> >> > + vc4_state->membus_load = 0;
>> >> > + vc4_state->hvs_load = 0;
>> >> > + for (i = 0; i < fb->format->num_planes; i++) {
>> >> > + unsigned long pixels_load;
>> >>
>> >> I'm scared any time I see longs. Do you want 32 or 64 bits here?
>> >
>> > I just assumed a 32bit unsigned var would be enough, so unsigned long
>> > seemed just fine. I can use u32 or u64 if you prefer.
>>
>> Yes, please. See also Maxime's recent trouble with a 64-bit kernel.
>
> Will use u32 then.
>
>>
>> >> > + /* Even if the bandwidth/plane required for a single frame is
>> >> > + *
>> >> > + * vc4_state->src_w[i] * vc4_state->src_h[i] * cpp * vrefresh
>> >> > + *
>> >> > + * when downscaling, we have to read more pixels per line in
>> >> > + * the time frame reserved for a single line, so the bandwidth
>> >> > + * demand can be punctually higher. To account for that, we
>> >> > + * calculate the down-scaling factor and multiply the plane
>> >> > + * load by this number. We're likely over-estimating the read
>> >> > + * demand, but that's better than under-estimating it.
>> >> > + */
>> >> > + vscale_factor = DIV_ROUND_UP(vc4_state->src_h[i],
>> >> > + vc4_state->crtc_h);
>> >> > + pixels_load = vc4_state->src_w[i] * vc4_state->src_h[i] *
>> >> > + vscale_factor;
>> >>
>> >> If we're upscaling (common for video, right?), aren't we under-counting
>> >> the cost? You need to scale/colorspace-convert crtc_w * crtc_h at 2
>> >> pixels per cycle.
>> >
>> > That's not entirely clear to me. I'm not sure what the scaler does when
>> > upscaling. Are the same pixels read several times from the memory? If
>> > that's the case, then the membus load should indeed be based on the
>> > crtc_w,h.
>>
>> I'm going to punt on this question because that would be a *lot* of
>> verilog tracing to figure out for me (and I'm not sure I'd even trust
>> what I came up with).
>>
>> > Also, when the spec says the HVS can process 4pixels/cycles, is it 4
>> > input pixels or 4 output pixels per cycle?
>>
>> Well, it's 4 pixels per cycle when not scaling, so both :)
>
> Sorry, I meant 2pixels/cycle :).
>
>>
>> I think the scaling pipeline is doing two output pixels per cycle.
>> Nothing else would make sense to me.
>
> Okay, so the HVS load should be based on crtc_w/h and the membus load
> should be based on src_w/h and the scaling ratio, right?
That sounds about right to me.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
