On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 03:05:09PM +0200, Luca Coelho wrote:
> From: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The max source and destination limits for scalers in MTL have changed.
> Use the new values accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> In v2:
> * No changes;
>
> In v3:
> * Removed stray reviewed-by tag;
> * Added my s-o-b.
>
> In v4:
> * No changes.
>
> In v5:
> * Just resent with a cover letter.
>
> In v6:
> * Now the correct version again (same as v4).
>
> In v7:
> * Update to new MTL limits according to the bspec.
>
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> index d7390067b7d4..01e881293612 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> @@ -87,6 +87,10 @@ static u16 skl_scaler_calc_phase(int sub, int scale, bool chroma_cosited)
> #define ICL_MAX_SRC_H 4096
> #define ICL_MAX_DST_W 5120
> #define ICL_MAX_DST_H 4096
> +#define MTL_MAX_SRC_W 4096
> +#define MTL_MAX_SRC_H 8192
> +#define MTL_MAX_DST_W 8192
> +#define MTL_MAX_DST_H 8192
> #define SKL_MIN_YUV_420_SRC_W 16
> #define SKL_MIN_YUV_420_SRC_H 16
>
> @@ -103,6 +107,8 @@ skl_update_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state, bool force_detach,
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
> const struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode =
> &crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode;
> + int min_src_w, min_src_h, min_dst_w, min_dst_h;
> + int max_src_w, max_src_h, max_dst_w, max_dst_h;
>
> /*
> * Src coordinates are already rotated by 270 degrees for
> @@ -157,15 +163,33 @@ skl_update_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state, bool force_detach,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> + min_src_w = SKL_MIN_SRC_W;
> + min_src_h = SKL_MIN_SRC_H;
> + min_dst_w = SKL_MIN_DST_W;
> + min_dst_h = SKL_MIN_DST_H;
> +
> + if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) < 11) {
> + max_src_w = SKL_MAX_SRC_W;
> + max_src_h = SKL_MAX_SRC_H;
> + max_dst_w = SKL_MAX_DST_W;
> + max_dst_h = SKL_MAX_DST_H;
> + } else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) < 14) {
> + max_src_w = ICL_MAX_SRC_W;
> + max_src_h = ICL_MAX_SRC_H;
> + max_dst_w = ICL_MAX_DST_W;
> + max_dst_h = ICL_MAX_DST_H;
> + } else {
> + max_src_w = MTL_MAX_SRC_W;
> + max_src_h = MTL_MAX_SRC_H;
> + max_dst_w = MTL_MAX_DST_W;
> + max_dst_h = MTL_MAX_DST_H;
> + }
> +
> /* range checks */
> - if (src_w < SKL_MIN_SRC_W || src_h < SKL_MIN_SRC_H ||
> - dst_w < SKL_MIN_DST_W || dst_h < SKL_MIN_DST_H ||
> - (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 &&
> - (src_w > ICL_MAX_SRC_W || src_h > ICL_MAX_SRC_H ||
> - dst_w > ICL_MAX_DST_W || dst_h > ICL_MAX_DST_H)) ||
> - (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) < 11 &&
> - (src_w > SKL_MAX_SRC_W || src_h > SKL_MAX_SRC_H ||
> - dst_w > SKL_MAX_DST_W || dst_h > SKL_MAX_DST_H))) {
> + if (src_w < min_src_w || src_h < min_src_h ||
> + dst_w < min_dst_w || dst_h < min_dst_h ||
> + src_w > max_src_w || src_h > max_src_h ||
> + dst_w > max_dst_w || dst_h > max_dst_h) {
Yep, that looks definitely way cleaner than initial condition.
Reviewed-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
> drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm,
> "scaler_user index %u.%u: src %ux%u dst %ux%u "
> "size is out of scaler range\n",
> --
> 2.39.0
>
