On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 08:59:44AM +0530, Karthik B S wrote:
> Check added to skip the watermark workarounds intended for Gen10 and
> below platforms in Gen11.

This seems a bit ambiguous for me, could you please improve the commit
message a bit?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Karthik B S <karthik....@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index d99e5fa..1928fe0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -4677,28 +4677,35 @@ static int skl_compute_plane_wm(const struct 
> drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>       res_lines = div_round_up_fixed16(selected_result,
>                                        wp->plane_blocks_per_line);
>  
> -     /* Display WA #1125: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
> -     if (level == 0 && wp->rc_surface)
> -             res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(wp->y_tile_minimum);
> -
> -     /* Display WA #1126: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
> -     if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
> -             if (wp->y_tiled) {
> +     if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 11) {
> +             /* Display WA #1125: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
> +             if (level == 0 && wp->rc_surface)
>                       res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(
>                                                       wp->y_tile_minimum);
> -                     res_lines += wp->y_min_scanlines;
> -             } else {
> -                     res_blocks++;
> +
> +             /* Display WA #1126: skl,bxt,kbl,glk */
> +             if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
> +                     if (wp->y_tiled) {
> +                             res_blocks += fixed16_to_u32_round_up(
> +                                                     wp->y_tile_minimum);
> +                             res_lines += wp->y_min_scanlines;
> +                     } else {
> +                             res_blocks++;
> +                     }
>               }
> +     }
>  
> -             /*
> -              * Make sure result blocks for higher latency levels are atleast
> -              * as high as level below the current level.
> -              * Assumption in DDB algorithm optimization for special cases.
> -              * Also covers Display WA #1125 for RC.
> -              */
> +     /*
> +      * Make sure result blocks for higher latency levels are atleast
> +      * as high as level below the current level.
> +      * Assumption in DDB algorithm optimization for special cases.
> +      * Also covers Display WA #1125 for RC.
> +      */
> +     if (level >= 1 && level <= 7) {
>               if (result_prev->plane_res_b > res_blocks)
>                       res_blocks = result_prev->plane_res_b;

Everything above makes sense and I checked against spec and it is right.

> +             if (result_prev->plane_res_l > res_lines)
> +                     res_lines = result_prev->plane_res_l;

My on;y concern here is with this line...
This seems a new addition that if needed needs to come in a
separated patch with its own justification.

Sorry for taking so long to review it.

Thanks,
Rodrigo.

>       }
>  
>       if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 11) {
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to