On 8/31/2018 8:02 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 08:59:44AM +0530, Karthik B S wrote:
Check added to skip the watermark workarounds intended for Gen10 and
below platforms in Gen11.
This seems a bit ambiguous for me, could you please improve the commit
message a bit?
Sure. I'll do it.
Signed-off-by: Karthik B S <karthik.b.s@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index d99e5fa..1928fe0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -4677,28 +4677,35 @@ static int skl_compute_plane_wm(const struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
res_lines = div_round_up_fixed16(selected_result,
wp->plane_blocks_per_line);
- /* Display WA #1125: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
- if (level == 0 && wp->rc_surface)
- res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(wp->y_tile_minimum);
-
- /* Display WA #1126: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
- if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
- if (wp->y_tiled) {
+ if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 11) {
+ /* Display WA #1125: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
+ if (level == 0 && wp->rc_surface)
res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(
wp->y_tile_minimum);
- res_lines += wp->y_min_scanlines;
- } else {
- res_blocks++;
+
+ /* Display WA #1126: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
+ if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
+ if (wp->y_tiled) {
+ res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(
+ wp->y_tile_minimum);
+ res_lines += wp->y_min_scanlines;
+ } else {
+ res_blocks++;
+ }
}
+ }
- /*
- * Make sure result blocks for higher latency levels are atleast
- * as high as level below the current level.
- * Assumption in DDB algorithm optimization for special cases.
- * Also covers Display WA #1125 for RC.
- */
+ /*
+ * Make sure result blocks for higher latency levels are atleast
+ * as high as level below the current level.
+ * Assumption in DDB algorithm optimization for special cases.
+ * Also covers Display WA #1125 for RC.
+ */
+ if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
if (result_prev->plane_res_b > res_blocks)
res_blocks = result_prev->plane_res_b;
Everything above makes sense and I checked against spec and it is right.
+ if (result_prev->plane_res_l > res_lines)
+ res_lines = result_prev->plane_res_l;
My on;y concern here is with this line...
This seems a new addition that if needed needs to come in a
separated patch with its own justification.
Sure. I will make a separate patch for the same.
Sorry for taking so long to review it.
Thanks,
Rodrigo.
}
if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 11) {
--
2.7.4
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
