On Mon, 30 May 2022, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 27 May 2022, Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Some machines declare DRRS type = seamless, DRRS = no, DMRRS = yes. >> I *think* DMRRS stands for "dynamcic media refresh rate", and >> I suspect the way it's meant to work is that it lets the driver >> switch refresh rates to match the frame rate for media playback. >> Obviously for us all that kind of policy stuff is entirely up to >> userspace, so the only thing we may do is make the extra refresh >> rate(s) available. >> >> So let's treat this case as just static DRRS for now. In the >> future We might want to differentiate the "seamless w/ downclocking" >> vs. "seamless w/o downclocking" cases so that we could do seamless >> refresh rate changes for systems that only claim to support DMRRS. >> >> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/125 >> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> Oh, the reasoning for some Acked-bys instead of Reviewed-bys today in this and another series: They could all be r-b in the sense that they do what they say on the box. But I don't really have the information to confirm they are the right thing to do. I'm acking "let's go with this, and see where it gets us". Make sense? BR, Jani. > >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c >> index 0774238e429b..c42b9e7d0dce 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c >> @@ -1279,8 +1279,16 @@ parse_panel_driver_features(struct drm_i915_private *i915, >> * static DRRS is 0 and DRRS not supported is represented by >> * driver->drrs_enabled=false >> */ >> - if (!driver->drrs_enabled) >> - panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_NONE; >> + if (!driver->drrs_enabled && panel->vbt.drrs_type != DRRS_TYPE_NONE) { >> + /* >> + * FIXME Should DMRRS perhaps be treated as seamless >> + * but without the automatic downclocking? >> + */ >> + if (driver->dmrrs_enabled) >> + panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_STATIC; >> + else >> + panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_NONE; >> + } >> >> panel->vbt.psr.enable = driver->psr_enabled; >> } >> @@ -1310,8 +1318,16 @@ parse_power_conservation_features(struct drm_i915_private *i915, >> * static DRRS is 0 and DRRS not supported is represented by >> * power->drrs & BIT(panel_type)=false >> */ >> - if (!(power->drrs & BIT(panel_type))) >> - panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_NONE; >> + if (!(power->drrs & BIT(panel_type)) && panel->vbt.drrs_type != DRRS_TYPE_NONE) { >> + /* >> + * FIXME Should DMRRS perhaps be treated as seamless >> + * but without the automatic downclocking? >> + */ >> + if (power->dmrrs & BIT(panel_type)) >> + panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_STATIC; >> + else >> + panel->vbt.drrs_type = DRRS_TYPE_NONE; >> + } >> >> if (i915->vbt.version >= 232) >> panel->vbt.edp.hobl = power->hobl & BIT(panel_type); -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
