On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:22:01PM +0300, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote: > Added bandwidth calculation algorithm and checks, > similar way as it was done for ICL, some constants > were corrected according to BSpec. > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx> > > v2: Start using same icl_get_bw_info function to avoid > code duplication. Moved mpagesize to memory info > related structure as it is now dependant on memory type. > Fixed qi.t_bl field assignment. > > Fixes: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111600 > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c > index 688858ebe4d0..c89fcdccac7e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ struct intel_qgv_info { > u8 num_points; > u8 num_channels; > u8 t_bl; > + u8 mpagesize; Looks like we're not using this at all. Probably easier to just rip it out entirely. > enum intel_dram_type dram_type; > }; > > @@ -56,7 +57,13 @@ static int icl_pcode_read_mem_global_info(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > qi->num_channels = (val & 0xf0) >> 4; > qi->num_points = (val & 0xf00) >> 8; > > - qi->t_bl = qi->dram_type == INTEL_DRAM_DDR4 ? 4 : 8; > + if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 11)) { > + qi->mpagesize = 16; > + qi->t_bl = qi->dram_type == INTEL_DRAM_DDR4 ? 4 : 8; > + } else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 12)) { > + qi->mpagesize = qi->dram_type == INTEL_DRAM_DDR4 ? 16 : 32; > + qi->t_bl = qi->dram_type == INTEL_DRAM_DDR4 ? 4 : 16; > + } > > return 0; > } > @@ -132,20 +139,26 @@ static int icl_sagv_max_dclk(const struct intel_qgv_info *qi) > } > > struct intel_sa_info { > - u8 deburst, mpagesize, deprogbwlimit, displayrtids; > + u16 displayrtids; > + u8 deburst, deprogbwlimit; > }; > > static const struct intel_sa_info icl_sa_info = { > .deburst = 8, > - .mpagesize = 16, > .deprogbwlimit = 25, /* GB/s */ > .displayrtids = 128, > }; > > -static int icl_get_bw_info(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > +static const struct intel_sa_info tgl_sa_info = { > + .deburst = 16, > + .deprogbwlimit = 34, /* GB/s */ > + .displayrtids = 256, > +}; > + > + Double newline. checkpatch should have complained I think. > +static int icl_get_bw_info(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, const struct intel_sa_info *sa) > { > struct intel_qgv_info qi = {}; > - const struct intel_sa_info *sa = &icl_sa_info; > bool is_y_tile = true; /* assume y tile may be used */ > int num_channels; > int deinterleave; > @@ -234,7 +247,9 @@ static unsigned int icl_max_bw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > void intel_bw_init_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > { > if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 11)) > - icl_get_bw_info(dev_priv); > + icl_get_bw_info(dev_priv, &icl_sa_info); > + else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 12)) > + icl_get_bw_info(dev_priv, &tgl_sa_info); The usual approach is to put the newer platform first. > } > > static unsigned int intel_max_data_rate(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > @@ -249,6 +264,10 @@ static unsigned int intel_max_data_rate(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > return min3(icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 0), > icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 1), > icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 2)); > + else if (IS_GEN(dev_priv, 12)) > + return min3(icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 0), > + icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 1), > + icl_max_bw(dev_priv, num_planes, 2)); Why add another identical branch? > else > return UINT_MAX; > } > -- > 2.17.1 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
