On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Extract a small helper to calculate the downscaling
> adjusted pixel rate/data rate/etc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c | 27 +++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c
> index c3f2962aa1eb..3f830b70b0c1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c
> @@ -133,25 +133,36 @@ intel_plane_destroy_state(struct drm_plane *plane,
> kfree(plane_state);
> }
>
> -unsigned int intel_plane_pixel_rate(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> - const struct intel_plane_state *plane_state)
> +static unsigned int intel_adjusted_rate(const struct drm_rect *src,
> + const struct drm_rect *dst,
> + unsigned int rate)
> {
> unsigned int src_w, src_h, dst_w, dst_h;
> - unsigned int pixel_rate = crtc_state->pixel_rate;
>
> - src_w = drm_rect_width(&plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> - src_h = drm_rect_height(&plane_state->uapi.src) >> 16;
> - dst_w = drm_rect_width(&plane_state->uapi.dst);
> - dst_h = drm_rect_height(&plane_state->uapi.dst);
> + src_w = drm_rect_width(src) >> 16;
> + src_h = drm_rect_height(src) >> 16;
> + dst_w = drm_rect_width(dst);
> + dst_h = drm_rect_height(dst);
>
> /* Downscaling limits the maximum pixel rate */
> dst_w = min(src_w, dst_w);
> dst_h = min(src_h, dst_h);
>
> - return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(mul_u32_u32(pixel_rate, src_w * src_h),
> + return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(mul_u32_u32(rate, src_w * src_h),
> dst_w * dst_h);
> }
>
> +unsigned int intel_plane_pixel_rate(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> + const struct intel_plane_state *plane_state)
> +{
> + if (!plane_state->uapi.visible)
Potential functional change not covered in the commit message? Makes
sense, but the rabbit hole is too deep to find out if this could
actually make a difference.
If mentioned in the commit message,
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
> + return 0;
> +
> + return intel_adjusted_rate(&plane_state->uapi.src,
> + &plane_state->uapi.dst,
> + crtc_state->pixel_rate);
> +}
> +
> unsigned int intel_plane_data_rate(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> const struct intel_plane_state *plane_state)
> {
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
