On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 00:38, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/11/2024 2:24 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 01:51:51PM -0800, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/29/2024 5:55 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >>> Virtual wide planes give high amount of flexibility, but it is not
> >>> always enough:
> >>>
> >>> In parallel multirect case only the half of the usual width is supported
> >>> for tiled formats. Thus the whole width of two tiled multirect
> >>> rectangles can not be greater than max_linewidth, which is not enough
> >>> for some platforms/compositors.
> >>>
> >>> Another example is as simple as wide YUV plane. YUV planes can not use
> >>> multirect, so currently they are limited to max_linewidth too.
> >>>
> >>> Now that the planes are fully virtualized, add support for allocating
> >>> two SSPP blocks to drive a single DRM plane. This fixes both mentioned
> >>> cases and allows all planes to go up to 2*max_linewidth (at the cost of
> >>> making some of the planes unavailable to the user).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Overall looks so much cleaner after unification!
> >>
> >> One small nit below,
> >>
> >>
> >> You can still have,
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Note: we have started testing this series with sc7180 CrOS, and will report
> >> our findings/ give tested-by this week.
> >>
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> +static bool dpu_plane_try_multirect_parallel(struct dpu_sw_pipe *pipe, struct dpu_sw_pipe_cfg *pipe_cfg,
> >>> + struct dpu_sw_pipe *r_pipe, struct dpu_sw_pipe_cfg *r_pipe_cfg,
> >>> + struct dpu_hw_sspp *sspp, const struct msm_format *fmt,
> >>> + uint32_t max_linewidth)
> >>> +{
> >>> + r_pipe->sspp = NULL;
> >>> +
> >>> + pipe->multirect_index = DPU_SSPP_RECT_SOLO;
> >>> + pipe->multirect_mode = DPU_SSPP_MULTIRECT_NONE;
> >>> +
> >>> + r_pipe->multirect_index = DPU_SSPP_RECT_SOLO;
> >>> + r_pipe->multirect_mode = DPU_SSPP_MULTIRECT_NONE;
> >>> +
> >>
> >>
> >> There are two places where the multirect_index and multirect_mode are reset.
> >> Would it be better to just have a small api dpu_plane_reset_multirect() and
> >> do this there?
> >
> > I'm not sure, what's the benefit. We can add an API to reset one pipe
> > (to also be able to use it in _dpu_plane_atomic_disable()), but then
> > it's just deduplication for the sake of deduplication.
> >
>
> Yeah I was thinking something like
>
> dpu_plane_reset_multirect(pipe);
> dpu_plane_reset_multirect(r_pipe);
>
> But its only a minor benefit, hence as I wrote it as a nit. We can keep
> things as it is, if its unnecessary in your opinion.
Well, granted that I hope to be able to drop non-virtual planes after
a few releases, I don't think it makes real sense.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
