From: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiY@xxxxxxxxx> Checking with hweight8 if plane configuration had changed seems to be wrong as different plane configs can result in a same hamming weight. So lets check the bitmask itself. Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c index e93a553a344d..a9ab66d97360 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c @@ -14614,7 +14614,13 @@ static int intel_atomic_check_planes(struct intel_atomic_state *state) old_active_planes = old_crtc_state->active_planes & ~BIT(PLANE_CURSOR); new_active_planes = new_crtc_state->active_planes & ~BIT(PLANE_CURSOR); - if (hweight8(old_active_planes) == hweight8(new_active_planes)) + /* + * Not only the number of planes, but if the plane configuration had + * changed might already mean we need to recompute min CDCLK, + * because different planes might consume different amount of Dbuf bandwidth + * according to formula: Bw per plane = Pixel rate * bpp * pipe/plane scale factor + */ + if (old_active_planes == new_active_planes) continue; ret = intel_crtc_add_planes_to_state(state, crtc, new_active_planes); -- 2.24.1.485.gad05a3d8e5 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
