On 25/10/2016 13:45, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Starting from commit b63a16f6cd89 ("drm/i915: Compute display surface
offset in the plane check hook for SKL+") we've already rotated the src
coordinates by 270 degrees by the time we check if a scaler is needed
or not, so we must not account for the rotation a second time.
Previously we did these steps in the opposite order and hence the
scaler check had to deal with rotation itself. The double rotation
handling causes us to enable a scaler pretty much every time 90/270
degree plane rotation is requested, leading to fuzzier fonts and whatnot.
Cc: Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: drm-intel-fixes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reported-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: b63a16f6cd89 ("drm/i915: Compute display surface offset in the plane check hook for SKL+")
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
index 5a036999487b..587cd604ce92 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
@@ -4671,7 +4671,7 @@ static void cpt_verify_modeset(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe)
static int
skl_update_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state, bool force_detach,
- unsigned scaler_user, int *scaler_id, unsigned int rotation,
+ unsigned scaler_user, int *scaler_id,
int src_w, int src_h, int dst_w, int dst_h)
{
struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_state =
@@ -4680,9 +4680,12 @@ skl_update_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state, bool force_detach,
to_intel_crtc(crtc_state->base.crtc);
int need_scaling;
- need_scaling = drm_rotation_90_or_270(rotation) ?
- (src_h != dst_w || src_w != dst_h):
- (src_w != dst_w || src_h != dst_h);
+ /*
+ * Src coordinates are already rotated by 270 degrees for
+ * the 90/270 degree plane rotation cases (to match the
+ * GTT mapping), hence no need to account for rotation here.
+ */
+ need_scaling = src_w != dst_w || src_h != dst_h;
/*
* if plane is being disabled or scaler is no more required or force detach
@@ -4749,7 +4752,7 @@ int skl_update_scaler_crtc(struct intel_crtc_state *state)
intel_crtc->pipe, SKL_CRTC_INDEX);
return skl_update_scaler(state, !state->base.active, SKL_CRTC_INDEX,
- &state->scaler_state.scaler_id, DRM_ROTATE_0,
+ &state->scaler_state.scaler_id,
state->pipe_src_w, state->pipe_src_h,
adjusted_mode->crtc_hdisplay, adjusted_mode->crtc_vdisplay);
}
@@ -4783,7 +4786,6 @@ static int skl_update_scaler_plane(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
ret = skl_update_scaler(crtc_state, force_detach,
drm_plane_index(&intel_plane->base),
&plane_state->scaler_id,
- plane_state->base.rotation,
drm_rect_width(&plane_state->base.src) >> 16,
drm_rect_height(&plane_state->base.src) >> 16,
drm_rect_width(&plane_state->base.dst),
Tested-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
After this only the DRM core revert remains. Is that one something of a
workaround or actually could get in?
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
