On 28-05-21, 13:29, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 21/05/2021 15:49, Vinod Koul wrote: > > DSC needs some configuration from device tree, add support to read and > > store these params and add DSC structures in msm_drv > > > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_host.c | 170 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h | 32 ++++++ > > 2 files changed, 202 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_host.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_host.c > > index 8a10e4343281..864d3c655e73 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_host.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_host.c > > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct msm_dsi_host { > > struct regmap *sfpb; > > struct drm_display_mode *mode; > > + struct msm_display_dsc_config *dsc; > > /* connected device info */ > > struct device_node *device_node; > > @@ -1744,6 +1745,168 @@ static int dsi_host_parse_lane_data(struct msm_dsi_host *msm_host, > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > +static u32 dsi_dsc_rc_buf_thresh[DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES - 1] = { > > + 0x0e, 0x1c, 0x2a, 0x38, 0x46, 0x54, 0x62, > > + 0x69, 0x70, 0x77, 0x79, 0x7b, 0x7d, 0x7e > > +}; > > I think we should move this table to a generic place. AMD and Intel DSC code > uses the same table, shifted by 6 (and both of those drivers shift it before > writing to the HW). Intel modifies this table for 6bpp case. AMD seems to > use it as is. > > > + > > +/* only 8bpc, 8bpp added */ > > +static char min_qp[DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES] = { > > + 0, 0, 1, 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 7, 13 > > +}; > > + > > +static char max_qp[DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES] = { > > + 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13, 15 > > +}; > > + > > +static char bpg_offset[DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES] = { > > + 2, 0, 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -8, -8, -10, -10, -12, -12, -12, -12 > > +}; > > And these parameters seem to be generic too. Intel DSC code contains them in > a bit different form. Should we probably move them to the drm_dsc.c and use > the tables the generic location? > > AMD drivers uses a bit different values at the first glance, so let's stick > with Intel version. Yeah I think this is a good suggestion. I did look into and had this in my todo. Yes drm_dsc.c would be apt for the move.. -- ~Vinod