On 01/15/2016 12:37 AM, Matt Roper wrote:
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 05:32:42PM +0530, Shobhit Kumar wrote:
From: "Kumar, Mahesh" <mahesh1.ku...@intel.com>
Don't always use bytes_per_pixel using y_plane=0, instead use it
according to pixel format. If NV12 use y_plane eqal to 1
Signed-off-by: Kumar, Mahesh <mahesh1.ku...@intel.com>
The second parameter to drm_format_plane_cpp() is the plane index
(0 => Y = 1bpp, 1 => UV = 2bpp), so I think passing 0 actually was what
we wanted, right?
Yes, I guess it was an oversight. Might have to test again for NV12 but
for now we can drop this patch.
Regards
Shobhit
Matt
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index 9df9e9a..68f21b9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -3185,7 +3185,9 @@ static bool skl_compute_plane_wm(const struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
if (latency == 0 || !cstate->base.active || !fb)
return false;
- bytes_per_pixel = drm_format_plane_cpp(fb->pixel_format, 0);
+ bytes_per_pixel = (fb->pixel_format == DRM_FORMAT_NV12) ?
+ drm_format_plane_cpp(fb->pixel_format, 1) :
+ drm_format_plane_cpp(fb->pixel_format, 0);
method1 = skl_wm_method1(skl_pipe_pixel_rate(cstate),
bytes_per_pixel,
latency);
--
2.4.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
