On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 05:41:45PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 05:00:30PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 01:19:37PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > > > According to spec, we should check if output_bpp * pixel_rate is less
> > > > than DDI clock * 72, if UHBR is used.
> > > >
> > > > HSDES: 1406899791
> > > > BSPEC: 49259
> > > >
> > > > v2: - Removed wrong comment(Rodrigo Vivi)
> > > > - Added HSDES to the commit msg(Rodrigo Vivi)
> > > > - Moved UHBR check to the MST specific code
> > > >
> > > > v3: - Changed commit subject(Rodrigo Vivi)
> > > > - Fixed the error message if check fails(Rodrigo Vivi)
> > > >
> > > > v4: - Move UHBR check to new helper function
> > > > - Now both for non-DSC/DSC we use that new check as
> > > > one of the constraints, when figuring out output bpp
> > > > to be used(Ville Syrjälä)
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> > > > index e3e7c305fece..b95051fed23d 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c
> > > > @@ -47,8 +47,19 @@
> > > >
> > > > static int intel_dp_mst_check_constraints(struct drm_i915_private *i915, int bpp,
> > > > const struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode,
> > > > - struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> > > > + struct intel_crtc_state *pipe_config)
> > > > {
> > > > + if (intel_dp_is_uhbr(pipe_config)) {
> > > > + int output_bpp = bpp;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (output_bpp * adjusted_mode->crtc_clock >=
> > > > + pipe_config->port_clock * 72) {
> > >
> > > This seems to be some DSC specific constraint, but this code appears to
> > > apply it also to uncompresed output.
> >
> > Was thinking about that. Looking at the initial HSD, also to the DSC page
> > in the BSpec, I have a strong feeling that this applies to any output bpp,
> > regardless if its compressed or not.
> > So decided to make this check more generic. I think this is a just general
> > Link BW limitation which just happened to be mentioned on DSC page.
> > I will clarify that.
> >
> > >
> > > Also DDICLK != port_clock, so this looks to be off by quite a lot.
> >
> > Any hints, what should I use instead?..
>
> DDICLK looks to be the symbol clock more or less (for 32bit symbols),
> so presumably you want a /32, with maybe an extra factor of 10^n in
> there, or not.
>
> That magic 72 is also strange. Maybe a 2*36, but dunno what that would
> really be either. The spec could really use some better explanations.
There is another check mentioned right above in the same place, which
I believe is related(btw, we probably need that one as well, if not added):
Output bpp < Number of lanes * DDICLK frequency * Bits per lane / Pixel clock
and bits per lane have to be:
DisplayPort 8b/10b bits per lane = 8
DisplayPort 2 128b/132b bits per lane = 32
The check we are talking here is:
Output bpp * Pixel clock < DDICLK frequency * 72 bits
Which means
Output bpp < (DDICLK frequency * 72 bits) / Pixel clock
So I guess that means that to get DDICLK I need to divide port_clock by bits_per_lane.
And 72 bits is a probably max symbol width which can be used due to some HW
restrictions.
Stan
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel
