On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 06:54:30PM +0000, Konduru, Chandra wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel Vetter > > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 7:20 AM > > To: Konduru, Chandra > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Conselvan De Oliveira, Ander; Vetter, Daniel > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/21] drm/i915: use current scaler state during > > readout_hw_state. > > > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 10:55:39PM -0700, Chandra Konduru wrote: > > > During readout_hw_state, whole pipe_config is built reading hw. > > > But rebuilding scaler state from hw requires, > > > - reading all planes and find its corresponding index in order to set > > > its bits in scaler_users > > > - reading cdclk and adjusted mode crtc clk in order to regenerate > > > min scaling ratios. > > > - some values directly from bspec > > > > > > To simplify things, for now using sw scaler state as readout state. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chandra Konduru <chandra.konduru@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > At least the crtc scaler might get used by the bios for boot-up with non-native > > resolution. I do think we need to properly track those parts (and also double- > > check the hw state in pipe config compare function like we do for the old pfit > > state). > > To cover above case, will populate the crtc scaler state. > > But population of scalers used for planes is tricky, because > in general there is no population of planes or its states from hw. > From scaler point of this may be ok because there aren't any > scalers in use for planes. Yeah plane scaler state is completely different. Imo it's ok to not care about that - as you spotted we almost completely lack state readout support for planes. No need to fix that in your series ;-) > > Maybe we need to always compute limits directly instead of storing the in the > > state structures? > > We are adjusting/computing some of limits from hw but not all > limits. > Along with crtc_scaler population, will add code to populate > limits that can be computed from hw. Rest will carry from previous > state. My suggestion was to completely remove the limit fields from the scaler state and always recompute them when needed. I think that would simplify the code in a few other places, and reduce changes that these computed values would get out of sync. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
