On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 01:37:42PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> We need to calculate cdclk after watermarks/ddb has been calculated
> as with recent hw CDCLK needs to be adjusted accordingly to DBuf
> requirements, which is not possible with current code organization.
>
> Setting CDCLK according to DBuf BW requirements and not just rejecting
> if it doesn't satisfy BW requirements, will allow us to save power when
> it is possible and gain additional bandwidth when it's needed - i.e
> boosting both our power management and perfomance capabilities.
>
> This patch is preparation for that, first we now extract modeset
> calculation from modeset checks, in order to call it after wm/ddb
> has been calculated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovs...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index 8f23c4d51c33..cdff3054b344 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -14542,6 +14542,14 @@ static int intel_modeset_checks(struct
> intel_atomic_state *state)
> return ret;
> }
>
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int intel_modeset_cdclk(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> +{
Misleading name here since you didn't extract just the cdclk part.
IMO just move intel_modeset_calc_cdclk() alone out from
intel_modeset_checks(), and keep the reordering minimal in that
patch. Ie. just call intel_modeset_calc_cdclk() right after
intel_modeset_checks().
Then in the next patch you can do the
intel_modeset_calc_cdclk()+intel_atomic_check_crtcs() vs. wm reorder.
The two things that currently need cdclk in intel_crtc_atomic_check()
would appear to be ips and linetime watermarks. The rest looks like
safe to reorder.
Though at least one thing that I think is totally misplaced is the
.crtc_compute_clock() call. That really should be done much earlier,
even earlier than where it is now. However since it doesn't
adjust .crtc_clock with the results of the computation doesn't really
matter for now. So looks like we can ignore this particular mess
for now.
>
> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(state->base.dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> ret = intel_modeset_calc_cdclk(state);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> @@ -14879,10 +14887,6 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
> goto fail;
> }
>
> - ret = intel_atomic_check_crtcs(state);
> - if (ret)
> - goto fail;
> -
> intel_fbc_choose_crtc(dev_priv, state);
> ret = calc_watermark_data(state);
> if (ret)
> @@ -14892,6 +14896,16 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
> if (ret)
> goto fail;
>
> + if (any_ms) {
> + ret = intel_modeset_cdclk(state);
> + if (ret)
> + goto fail;
> + }
> +
> + ret = intel_atomic_check_crtcs(state);
> + if (ret)
> + goto fail;
> for_each_oldnew_intel_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, old_crtc_state,
> new_crtc_state, i) {
> if (!needs_modeset(new_crtc_state) &&
> --
> 2.24.1.485.gad05a3d8e5
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
