On 22/02/16 14:56, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Op 22-02-16 om 15:27 schreef Tvrtko Ursulin:
On 22/02/16 13:09, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Hey,

Op 22-02-16 om 12:52 schreef Tvrtko Ursulin:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>

Not sure if intel_wm_config->num_pipes_active is supposed to
ever be zero when intel_update_watermarks gets called. But
since it can be triggered in early platform bringup perhaps
we want to guard against it rather than divide by zero.

Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.ro...@intel.com>
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com>
---
   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 9 +++++++--
   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index feb57598727a..2b7998889617 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -2831,8 +2831,13 @@ skl_ddb_get_pipe_allocation_limits(struct drm_device 
*dev,
                nth_active_pipe++;
        }

-       pipe_size = ddb_size / config->num_pipes_active;
-       alloc->start = nth_active_pipe * ddb_size / config->num_pipes_active;
+       if (WARN_ON(!config->num_pipes_active)) {
+               pipe_size = 0;
+               alloc->start = 0;
+       } else {
+               pipe_size = ddb_size / config->num_pipes_active;
+               alloc->start = nth_active_pipe * ddb_size / 
config->num_pipes_active;
+       }
        alloc->end = alloc->start + pipe_size;
   }

How can this happen? It seems in that case cstate->base.active would be false 
for the current pipe,
and the code should bail early already..
Don't know, but does it harm to guard against it? Helps early
platform bringup a bit.

  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CRTC:21] hw state readout: enabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CRTC:26] hw state readout: disabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CRTC:31] hw state readout: disabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] PORT PLL A hw state readout: crtc_mask 
0x00000001, on 0
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] PORT PLL B hw state readout: crtc_mask 
0x00000000, on 0
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] PORT PLL C hw state readout: crtc_mask 
0x00000000, on 0
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:33:TMDS-33] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe A
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:35:DP MST-35] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe A
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:36:DP MST-36] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe B
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:37:DP MST-37] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe C
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:42:TMDS-42] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe A
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:44:DP MST-44] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe A
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:45:DP MST-45] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe B
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [ENCODER:46:DP MST-46] hw state readout: 
disabled, pipe C
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CONNECTOR:34:DP-1] hw state readout: 
disabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CONNECTOR:40:HDMI-A-1] hw state 
readout: disabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CONNECTOR:43:DP-2] hw state readout: 
disabled
  [drm:intel_modeset_readout_hw_state] [CONNECTOR:47:HDMI-A-2] hw state 
readout: disabled
  [drm:drm_calc_timestamping_constants [drm]] *ERROR* crtc 21: Can't calculate 
constants, dotclock = 0!
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:i915_get_vblank_timestamp] crtc 0 is disabled
  [drm:intel_disable_pipe] disabling pipe A

Uh oh, we didn't update the atomic state which confused the wm stuff.

Does the below work?

Yep, with your patch it doesn't trigger my would-be-div-by-zero warning any more.

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to