On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 10:58:04AM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 10:01:28PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:20:03AM +0300, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > > Addressing one of the comments, recommending to extract platform
> > > specific code from intel_can_enable_sagv as a preparation, before
> > > we are going to add support for tgl+.
> > >
> > > Current code in intel_can_enable_sagv is valid only for skl,
> > > so this patch adds also proper support for icl, subsequent
> > > patches will add support for tgl+, combined with other required
> > > changes.
> > >
> > > v2: - Renamed icl_can_enable_sagv into icl_crtc_can_enable_sagv(Ville)
> > > - Removed dev variables(Ville)
> > > - Constified crtc/plane_state in icl_crtc_can_enable_sagv
> > > function(Ville)
> > > - Added hw.active check(Ville)
> > > - Refactored if ladder(Ville)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > > 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > index f8d62d1977ac..27d4d626cb34 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > > @@ -3757,42 +3757,25 @@ intel_disable_sagv(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > -bool intel_can_enable_sagv(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > +static bool icl_crtc_can_enable_sagv(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> > > {
> > > - struct drm_device *dev = state->base.dev;
> > > - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
> > > - struct intel_crtc *crtc;
> > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc_state->uapi.crtc->dev);
> > > + struct intel_crtc *crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc_state->uapi.crtc);
> > > struct intel_plane *plane;
> > > - struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state;
> > > - enum pipe pipe;
> > > + const struct intel_plane_state *plane_state;
> > > int level, latency;
> > >
> > > - if (!intel_has_sagv(dev_priv))
> > > + if (crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode.flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE) {
> > > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("No SAGV for interlaced mode on pipe %c\n",
> > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe));
> > > return false;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > - /*
> > > - * If there are no active CRTCs, no additional checks need be performed
> > > - */
> > > - if (hweight8(state->active_pipes) == 0)
> > > + if (!crtc_state->hw.active)
> >
> > Should really be checked before anything else. Doesn't matter too much
> > anymore since I made us clear the crtc state always, but still a bit
> > inconsistent to look at other stuff in the state before we even know if
> > the crtc is even enabled.
> >
> > > return true;
> > >
> > > - /*
> > > - * SKL+ workaround: bspec recommends we disable SAGV when we have
> > > - * more then one pipe enabled
> > > - */
> > > - if (hweight8(state->active_pipes) > 1)
> > > - return false;
> > > -
> > > - /* Since we're now guaranteed to only have one active CRTC... */
> > > - pipe = ffs(state->active_pipes) - 1;
> > > - crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_pipe(dev_priv, pipe);
> > > - crtc_state = to_intel_crtc_state(crtc->base.state);
> > > -
> > > - if (crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode.flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE)
> > > - return false;
> > > -
> > > - for_each_intel_plane_on_crtc(dev, crtc, plane) {
> > > - struct skl_plane_wm *wm =
> > > + intel_atomic_crtc_state_for_each_plane_state(plane, plane_state, crtc_state) {
> > > + const struct skl_plane_wm *wm =
> > > &crtc_state->wm.skl.optimal.planes[plane->id];
> > >
> > > /* Skip this plane if it's not enabled */
> > > @@ -3807,7 +3790,7 @@ bool intel_can_enable_sagv(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > latency = dev_priv->wm.skl_latency[level];
> > >
> > > if (skl_needs_memory_bw_wa(dev_priv) &&
> > > - plane->base.state->fb->modifier ==
> > > + plane_state->uapi.fb->modifier ==
> >
> > hw.fb
> >
> > With those this is basically good, but still need to think how to avoid
> > the regression due to only checking the crtcs in the state.
>
> Well tbh, initially you told me that this *_crtc_can_enable_sagv function extraction
> can be "trivially" done as a separate patch :)) So I followed your instruction, and
> then I got a comment saying that "this is now temporary busted because we are checking
> only crtcs in a state". This kind of contraversial requirements - in order not to
> have it "temporary busted", we should have introduced it at the same time with SAGV mask,
> at the same time you wanted it to be extracted as a separate patch.
TBF this patch does quite a bit more than extract the current code.
What I think would work as a series is something like:
patch 1:
+intel_crtc_can_enable_sagv(crtc_state)
{
+ stuff
}
intel_can_enable_sagv(state)
{
...
crtc_state = to_intel_crtc_state(crtc->base.state);
- stuff
+ return intel_crtc_can_eanble_sagv(crtc_state);
}
patch 2:
+sagv_pre_plane_update(state)
+{
+ if (!intel_can_enable_sagv(state))
+ intel_disable_sagv(dev_priv);
+}
intel_atomic_commit_tail()
{
...
- if (!intel_can_enable_sagv(state))
- intel_disable_sagv(dev_priv);
+ sagv_pre_plane_update(state);
...
}
(+ identical changes for post_plane_update())
So far everything has been pure refactoring.
patch 3:
Introduce the sagv mask in bw state and precompute it using
intel_crtc_can_enable_sagv() (while fixing the iterator issue therein),
and update the pre/post hooks to consult said mask. Not quite pure
refactoring anymore but seems like a bit more straightforward change
now.
At this point we should have a nicely precomputed sagv mask without
intentional changes to current behaviour. After which it should be
easier to extend this for new platforms.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
