Op 25-09-2019 om 12:26 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:21:09AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> There was a integer wraparound when mode_clock became too high,
>> and we didn't correct for the FEC overhead factor when dividing,
>> with the calculations breaking at HBR3.
>>
>> As a result our calculated bpp was way too high, and the link width
>> limitation never came into effect.
>>
>> Print out the resulting bpp calcululations as a sanity check, just
>> in case we ever have to debug it later on again.
>>
>> We also used the wrong factor for FEC. While bspec mentions 2.4%,
>> all the calculations use 1/0.972261, and the same ratio should be
>> applied to data M/N as well, so use it there when FEC is enabled.
>>
>> This fixes the FIFO underrun we are seeing with FEC enabled.
>>
>> Changes since v2:
>> - Handle fec_enable in intel_link_compute_m_n, so only data M/N is adjusted. (Ville)
>> - Fix initial hardware readout for FEC. (Ville)
>> Changes since v3:
>> - Remove bogus fec_to_mode_clock. (Ville)
>> Changes since v4:
>> - Use the correct register for icl. (Ville)
>> - Split hw readout to a separate patch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Fixes: d9218c8f6cf4 ("drm/i915/dp: Add helpers for Compressed BPP and Slice Count for DSC")
>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v5.0+
>> Cc: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 12 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c | 184 ++++++++++---------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.h | 6 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_mst.c | 2 +-
>> 5 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
>> index 5ecf54270181..c4c9286be987 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
>> @@ -7291,7 +7291,7 @@ static int ironlake_fdi_compute_config(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>> pipe_config->fdi_lanes = lane;
>>
>> intel_link_compute_m_n(pipe_config->pipe_bpp, lane, fdi_dotclock,
>> - link_bw, &pipe_config->fdi_m_n, false);
>> + link_bw, &pipe_config->fdi_m_n, false, false);
>>
>> ret = ironlake_check_fdi_lanes(dev, intel_crtc->pipe, pipe_config);
>> if (ret == -EDEADLK)
>> @@ -7538,11 +7538,15 @@ void
>> intel_link_compute_m_n(u16 bits_per_pixel, int nlanes,
>> int pixel_clock, int link_clock,
>> struct intel_link_m_n *m_n,
>> - bool constant_n)
>> + bool constant_n, bool fec_enable)
>> {
>> - m_n->tu = 64;
>> + u32 data_clock = bits_per_pixel * pixel_clock;
>> +
>> + if (fec_enable)
>> + data_clock = intel_dp_mode_to_fec_clock(data_clock);
>>
>> - compute_m_n(bits_per_pixel * pixel_clock,
>> + m_n->tu = 64;
>> + compute_m_n(data_clock,
>> link_clock * nlanes * 8,
>> &m_n->gmch_m, &m_n->gmch_n,
>> constant_n);
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h
>> index 5cea6f8e107a..4b9e18e5a263 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h
>> @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ enum phy_fia {
>> void intel_link_compute_m_n(u16 bpp, int nlanes,
>> int pixel_clock, int link_clock,
>> struct intel_link_m_n *m_n,
>> - bool constant_n);
>> + bool constant_n, bool fec_enable);
>> bool is_ccs_modifier(u64 modifier);
>> void lpt_disable_clkout_dp(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>> u32 intel_plane_fb_max_stride(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> index 829559f97440..2b1e71f992b0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -76,8 +76,8 @@
>> #define DP_DSC_MAX_ENC_THROUGHPUT_0 340000
>> #define DP_DSC_MAX_ENC_THROUGHPUT_1 400000
>>
>> -/* DP DSC FEC Overhead factor = (100 - 2.4)/100 */
>> -#define DP_DSC_FEC_OVERHEAD_FACTOR 976
>> +/* DP DSC FEC Overhead factor = 1/(0.972261) */
>> +#define DP_DSC_FEC_OVERHEAD_FACTOR 972261
>>
>> /* Compliance test status bits */
>> #define INTEL_DP_RESOLUTION_SHIFT_MASK 0
>> @@ -492,6 +492,97 @@ int intel_dp_get_link_train_fallback_values(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +u32 intel_dp_mode_to_fec_clock(u32 mode_clock)
>> +{
>> + return div_u64(mul_u32_u32(mode_clock, 1000000U),
>> + DP_DSC_FEC_OVERHEAD_FACTOR);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static u16 intel_dp_dsc_get_output_bpp(u32 link_clock, u32 lane_count,
>> + u32 mode_clock, u32 mode_hdisplay)
>> +{
>> + u32 bits_per_pixel, max_bpp_small_joiner_ram;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Available Link Bandwidth(Kbits/sec) = (NumberOfLanes)*
>> + * (LinkSymbolClock)* 8 * (TimeSlotsPerMTP)
>> + * for SST -> TimeSlotsPerMTP is 1,
>> + * for MST -> TimeSlotsPerMTP has to be calculated
>> + */
>> + bits_per_pixel = (link_clock * lane_count * 8) /
>> + intel_dp_mode_to_fec_clock(mode_clock);
> Hmm. Aren't we adding the FEC overhead twice now when DSC is also
> enabled?
No? This is calculating the maximum bpp that can be used for DSC.
"For cases where FEC is enabled, pixel clock is replaced by pixel clock/0.972261 in the above calculations."
This bpp check here is to ensure that data M <= N.
~Maarten
