On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 05:17:41PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 04:40:28PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 02:29:28PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 12:43:46PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 12:27:18PM +0200, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 12:10:52PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 09:20:09PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote: > > > > > > > Handle only bigjoiner masters in skl_commit_modeset_enables/disables, > > > > > > > slave crtcs should be handled by master hooks. Same for encoders. > > > > > > > That way we can also remove a bunch of checks like intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner_slave. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v2: Get rid of master vs slave checks and separation in crtc enable/disable hooks. > > > > > > > Use unified iteration cycle for all of those, while enabling/disabling > > > > > > > transcoder only for those pipes where its needed(Ville Syrjälä) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v3: Move all the intel_encoder_* calls under transcoder code path(Ville Syrjälä) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v4: - Call intel_crtc_vblank_on from hsw_crtc_enable only for non-transcoder path > > > > > > > (for master pipe that will be called from intel_encoders_enable/intel_enable_ddi) > > > > > > > - Fix stupid mistake with using crtc->pipe for the mask, instead of BIT(crtc->pipe) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c | 21 +-- > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 183 ++++++++++++------- > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h | 6 + > > > > > > > 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > > > > > > > index bea4415902044..6071e9f500871 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > > > > > > > @@ -3100,7 +3100,6 @@ static void intel_ddi_post_disable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > const struct drm_connector_state *old_conn_state) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(encoder->base.dev); > > > > > > > - struct intel_crtc *slave_crtc; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (!intel_crtc_has_type(old_crtc_state, INTEL_OUTPUT_DP_MST)) { > > > > > > > intel_crtc_vblank_off(old_crtc_state); > > > > > > > @@ -3117,17 +3116,6 @@ static void intel_ddi_post_disable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > ilk_pfit_disable(old_crtc_state); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > The master pipe stuff is right here ^ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&dev_priv->drm, slave_crtc, > > > > > > > - intel_crtc_bigjoiner_slave_pipes(old_crtc_state)) { > > > > > > > - const struct intel_crtc_state *old_slave_crtc_state = > > > > > > > - intel_atomic_get_old_crtc_state(state, slave_crtc); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - intel_crtc_vblank_off(old_slave_crtc_state); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - intel_dsc_disable(old_slave_crtc_state); > > > > > > > - skl_scaler_disable(old_slave_crtc_state); > > > > > > > - } > > > > > > > > > > > > .. but now you're moving the slave pipe stuff somewhere else? > > > > > > > > > > > > We should be just iterating the pipes here (assuming this > > > > > > is the correct spot to do these steps). > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > /* > > > > > > > * When called from DP MST code: > > > > > > > * - old_conn_state will be NULL > > > > > > > @@ -3363,8 +3351,7 @@ static void intel_enable_ddi(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > drm_WARN_ON(state->base.dev, crtc_state->has_pch_encoder); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (!intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner_slave(crtc_state)) > > > > > > > - intel_ddi_enable_transcoder_func(encoder, crtc_state); > > > > > > > + intel_ddi_enable_transcoder_func(encoder, crtc_state); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* Enable/Disable DP2.0 SDP split config before transcoder */ > > > > > > > intel_audio_sdp_split_update(crtc_state); > > > > > > > @@ -3469,9 +3456,6 @@ void intel_ddi_update_active_dpll(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(encoder->base.dev); > > > > > > > - struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state = > > > > > > > - intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc); > > > > > > > - struct intel_crtc *slave_crtc; > > > > > > > enum phy phy = intel_port_to_phy(i915, encoder->port); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* FIXME: Add MTL pll_mgr */ > > > > > > > @@ -3479,9 +3463,6 @@ void intel_ddi_update_active_dpll(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > return; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intel_update_active_dpll(state, crtc, encoder); > > > > > > > - for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(&i915->drm, slave_crtc, > > > > > > > - intel_crtc_bigjoiner_slave_pipes(crtc_state)) > > > > > > > - intel_update_active_dpll(state, slave_crtc, encoder); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > static void > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > > > > index 916c13a149fd5..e1ea53fd6a288 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > > > > @@ -1631,31 +1631,12 @@ static void hsw_configure_cpu_transcoder(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_sta > > > > > > > hsw_set_transconf(crtc_state); > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -static void hsw_crtc_enable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > - struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > > > > > > +static void hsw_crtc_enable_pre_transcoder(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > + struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state = > > > > > > > intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc); > > > > > > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev); > > > > > > > - enum pipe pipe = crtc->pipe, hsw_workaround_pipe; > > > > > > > - enum transcoder cpu_transcoder = new_crtc_state->cpu_transcoder; > > > > > > > - bool psl_clkgate_wa; > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - if (drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm, crtc->active)) > > > > > > > - return; > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - intel_dmc_enable_pipe(dev_priv, crtc->pipe); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - if (!new_crtc_state->bigjoiner_pipes) { > > > > > > > - intel_encoders_pre_pll_enable(state, crtc); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - if (new_crtc_state->shared_dpll) > > > > > > > - intel_enable_shared_dpll(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - intel_encoders_pre_enable(state, crtc); > > > > > > > - } else { > > > > > > > - icl_ddi_bigjoiner_pre_enable(state, new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > - } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intel_dsc_enable(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1665,19 +1646,17 @@ static void hsw_crtc_enable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > intel_set_pipe_src_size(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 9 || IS_BROADWELL(dev_priv)) > > > > > > > bdw_set_pipe_misc(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (!intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner_slave(new_crtc_state) && > > > > > > > - !transcoder_is_dsi(cpu_transcoder)) > > > > > > > - hsw_configure_cpu_transcoder(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > +static void hsw_crtc_enable_post_transcoder(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > + struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > + const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state = > > > > > > > + intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc); > > > > > > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crtc->active = true; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - /* Display WA #1180: WaDisableScalarClockGating: glk */ > > > > > > > - psl_clkgate_wa = DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == 10 && > > > > > > > - new_crtc_state->pch_pfit.enabled; > > > > > > > - if (psl_clkgate_wa) > > > > > > > - glk_pipe_scaler_clock_gating_wa(dev_priv, pipe, true); > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 9) > > > > > > > skl_pfit_enable(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > else > > > > > > > @@ -1700,27 +1679,84 @@ static void hsw_crtc_enable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > icl_set_pipe_chicken(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intel_initial_watermarks(state, crtc); > > > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (intel_crtc_is_bigjoiner_slave(new_crtc_state)) > > > > > > > - intel_crtc_vblank_on(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > +static void hsw_crtc_enable(struct intel_atomic_state *state, > > > > > > > + struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > + const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state = > > > > > > > + intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, crtc); > > > > > > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev); > > > > > > > + enum transcoder cpu_transcoder = new_crtc_state->cpu_transcoder; > > > > > > > + struct intel_crtc *_crtc; > > > > > > > + int slave_pipe_mask = intel_crtc_bigjoiner_slave_pipes(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > + int pipe_mask = slave_pipe_mask | BIT(crtc->pipe); > > > > > > > + bool psl_clkgate_wa; > > > > > > > + enum pipe pipe = crtc->pipe, hsw_workaround_pipe; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - intel_encoders_enable(state, crtc); > > > > > > > + if (drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm, crtc->active)) > > > > > > > + return; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - if (psl_clkgate_wa) { > > > > > > > - intel_crtc_wait_for_next_vblank(crtc); > > > > > > > - glk_pipe_scaler_clock_gating_wa(dev_priv, pipe, false); > > > > > > > - } > > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > > + * Use reverse iterator to go through slave pipes first. > > > > > > > + * TODO: We might need smarter iterator here > > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > > + for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask_reverse(&dev_priv->drm, _crtc, > > > > > > > + pipe_mask) { > > > > > > > + const struct intel_crtc_state *_new_crtc_state = > > > > > > > + intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, _crtc); > > > > > > > + bool needs_transcoder = ((slave_pipe_mask & BIT(_crtc->pipe)) == 0) && > > > > > > > + !transcoder_is_dsi(cpu_transcoder); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + intel_dmc_enable_pipe(dev_priv, crtc->pipe); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + if (!new_crtc_state->bigjoiner_pipes) { > > > > > > > + if (needs_transcoder) > > > > > > > + intel_encoders_pre_pll_enable(state, crtc); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + if (new_crtc_state->shared_dpll) > > > > > > > + intel_enable_shared_dpll(new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + if (needs_transcoder) > > > > > > > + intel_encoders_pre_enable(state, crtc); > > > > > > > + } else { > > > > > > > + icl_ddi_bigjoiner_pre_enable(state, new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > > That mess needs to be eliminated entirely. > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, was thinking about this too, was just a bit unsure how.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + hsw_crtc_enable_pre_transcoder(state, _crtc); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + if (needs_transcoder) > > > > > > > + hsw_configure_cpu_transcoder(_new_crtc_state); > > > > > > > > > > > > These transcoder things should not be within any pipe loop at all. > > > > > > > > > > I didn't want to split the loop, which I would have to do otherwise, > > > > > but may be it makes sense, since transcoder path is needed only for master > > > > > pipe. However what if _hypothetically_ :) we would have more than one master > > > > > pipe? > > > > > > > > Doesn't matter how many pipes there are. There is always just one > > > > transcoder. > > > > > > How I see it now, the sequence for example for master hsw_crtc_enable is: > > > > > > pipe1 stuff before transcoder > > > (transcoder programming not needed) > > > pipe1 stuff after transcoder > > > > > > pipe0 stuff before transcoder > > > transcoder programmed > > > pipe0 stuff after transcoder > > > > > > if we want to have a single unified loop for all pipes, I guess we have to > > > have a transcoder check inside a loop, because we cant do the > > > "pipe0 stuff after transcoder" thing, before the transcoder is programmed. > > > > > > I could of course split it this way: > > > > > > for (...) > > > pipe stuff before transcoder > > > > > > transcoder programmed > > > > > > for (...) > > > pipe stuff after transcoder > > > > > > but then the sequence still will be different from original, it will look like: > > > pipe1 stuff before transcoder > > > > > > pipe0 stuff before transcoder > > > > > > transcoder programmed > > > > > > pipe1 stuff after transcoder > > > > > > pipe0 stuff after transcoder > > > > > > which is different from original sequence, because we in fact > > > want that: > > > program pipe1(slave) > > > > > > program pipe0 stuff before transcoder(master) > > > program transcoder > > > program pipe0 stuff after transcoder(master) > > > > > > So do you think that splitting won't harm or you see some other way to do that? > > > > The current code is mostly nonsense I think. Probably only work > > through the power of prayer. I think we need to be able to control > > the per-pipe vs. per-transcoder steps more freely to make it actually > > correct. > > > Ville, could you communicate to me next time, if you decide to do everything > yourself or you see it some other way. > Basically I was trying to discuss how you see things here and then it just ends > up that way. > If you didn't like the whole approach why I hear this only now, was following > all your comments and asking questions. > You could either communicate your ideas to me or at least communicate that you > plan to send own series.. > Now we had a discussion, some particular things were discussed, then suddenly > you say that everything is crap and send own series. > > Is that really professional team work? > > Stan > > > > > I fired off a quick attempt at converting the disable side, > > since that is a bit more straightforwad. The end result looks > > fairly reasonable to me at least. > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/130619/ > > Ville, could you communicate to me next time, if you decide to do everything I didn't do everything. Just enough to demonstrate the direction where I think we should go. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel