All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
@ 2017-06-01 10:34 Maarten Lankhorst
  2017-06-01 10:50 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maarten Lankhorst @ 2017-06-01 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: intel-gfx

Seems that GLK has a dotclock that's twice the display clock.
skl_max_scale checks for IS_GEMINILAKE, so perform the same check here.

While at it, change the DRM_ERROR to DEBUG_KMS.

Fixes: 73b0ca8ec76d ("drm/i915/skl+: consider max supported plane pixel
rate while scaling")
Cc: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 12 ++++++++----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index 2042f6512e6e..88c8a3511e24 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
 	struct drm_plane *plane;
 	const struct drm_plane_state *pstate;
 	struct intel_plane_state *intel_pstate;
-	int crtc_clock, cdclk;
+	int crtc_clock, dotclk;
 	uint32_t pipe_max_pixel_rate;
 	uint_fixed_16_16_t pipe_downscale;
 	uint_fixed_16_16_t max_downscale = u32_to_fixed_16_16(1);
@@ -4157,11 +4157,15 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
 	pipe_downscale = mul_fixed16(pipe_downscale, max_downscale);
 
 	crtc_clock = crtc_state->adjusted_mode.crtc_clock;
-	cdclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
-	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(cdclk, pipe_downscale);
+	dotclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
+
+	if (IS_GEMINILAKE(to_i915(intel_crtc->base.dev)))
+		dotclk *= 2;
+
+	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(dotclk, pipe_downscale);
 
 	if (pipe_max_pixel_rate < crtc_clock) {
-		DRM_ERROR("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
+		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
-- 
2.11.0

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

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
  2017-06-01 10:34 [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate Maarten Lankhorst
@ 2017-06-01 10:50 ` Patchwork
  2017-06-01 10:52 ` [PATCH] " Mahesh Kumar
  2017-06-01 13:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-06-01 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Maarten Lankhorst; +Cc: intel-gfx

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/25155/
State : success

== Summary ==

Series 25155v1 drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/25155/revisions/1/mbox/

Test kms_busy:
        Subgroup basic-flip-default-a:
                pass       -> DMESG-WARN (fi-skl-6700hq) fdo#101144 +1

fdo#101144 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101144

fi-bdw-5557u     total:278  pass:267  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:11  time:443s
fi-bdw-gvtdvm    total:278  pass:256  dwarn:8   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:14  time:434s
fi-bsw-n3050     total:278  pass:242  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:36  time:576s
fi-bxt-j4205     total:278  pass:259  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:19  time:515s
fi-byt-j1900     total:278  pass:254  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:24  time:493s
fi-byt-n2820     total:278  pass:250  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:28  time:476s
fi-hsw-4770      total:278  pass:262  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:16  time:430s
fi-hsw-4770r     total:278  pass:262  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:16  time:410s
fi-ilk-650       total:278  pass:228  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:50  time:416s
fi-ivb-3520m     total:278  pass:260  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:18  time:490s
fi-ivb-3770      total:278  pass:260  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:18  time:464s
fi-kbl-7500u     total:278  pass:255  dwarn:5   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:18  time:470s
fi-kbl-7560u     total:278  pass:263  dwarn:5   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:10  time:568s
fi-skl-6260u     total:278  pass:268  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:10  time:457s
fi-skl-6700hq    total:278  pass:228  dwarn:1   dfail:0   fail:27  skip:22  time:404s
fi-skl-6700k     total:278  pass:256  dwarn:4   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:18  time:465s
fi-skl-6770hq    total:278  pass:268  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:10  time:502s
fi-skl-gvtdvm    total:278  pass:265  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:13  time:436s
fi-snb-2520m     total:278  pass:250  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:28  time:538s
fi-snb-2600      total:278  pass:249  dwarn:0   dfail:0   fail:0   skip:29  time:402s

b0d30ff104856c5c49eee882d77aac32928f9724 drm-tip: 2017y-06m-01d-09h-45m-19s UTC integration manifest
50ad41b drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/CI/Patchwork_4854/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
  2017-06-01 10:34 [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate Maarten Lankhorst
  2017-06-01 10:50 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
@ 2017-06-01 10:52 ` Mahesh Kumar
  2017-06-01 10:54   ` Maarten Lankhorst
  2017-06-01 13:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mahesh Kumar @ 2017-06-01 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Maarten Lankhorst, intel-gfx


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2094 bytes --]

hmm... didn't considered 2 pixels per clock.

thanks.

Reviewed-by: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>


On Thursday 01 June 2017 04:04 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Seems that GLK has a dotclock that's twice the display clock.
> skl_max_scale checks for IS_GEMINILAKE, so perform the same check here.
>
> While at it, change the DRM_ERROR to DEBUG_KMS.
>
> Fixes: 73b0ca8ec76d ("drm/i915/skl+: consider max supported plane pixel
> rate while scaling")
> Cc: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 12 ++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index 2042f6512e6e..88c8a3511e24 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>   	struct drm_plane *plane;
>   	const struct drm_plane_state *pstate;
>   	struct intel_plane_state *intel_pstate;
> -	int crtc_clock, cdclk;
> +	int crtc_clock, dotclk;
>   	uint32_t pipe_max_pixel_rate;
>   	uint_fixed_16_16_t pipe_downscale;
>   	uint_fixed_16_16_t max_downscale = u32_to_fixed_16_16(1);
> @@ -4157,11 +4157,15 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>   	pipe_downscale = mul_fixed16(pipe_downscale, max_downscale);
>   
>   	crtc_clock = crtc_state->adjusted_mode.crtc_clock;
> -	cdclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
> -	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(cdclk, pipe_downscale);
> +	dotclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
> +
> +	if (IS_GEMINILAKE(to_i915(intel_crtc->base.dev)))
> +		dotclk *= 2;
> +
> +	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(dotclk, pipe_downscale);
>   
>   	if (pipe_max_pixel_rate < crtc_clock) {
> -		DRM_ERROR("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
> +		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   	}
>   


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2699 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
  2017-06-01 10:52 ` [PATCH] " Mahesh Kumar
@ 2017-06-01 10:54   ` Maarten Lankhorst
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maarten Lankhorst @ 2017-06-01 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mahesh Kumar, intel-gfx

Op 01-06-17 om 12:52 schreef Mahesh Kumar:
>
> hmm... didn't considered 2 pixels per clock.
>
> thanks.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>
>
Thanks, fix pushed. :)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
  2017-06-01 10:34 [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate Maarten Lankhorst
  2017-06-01 10:50 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
  2017-06-01 10:52 ` [PATCH] " Mahesh Kumar
@ 2017-06-01 13:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
  2017-06-01 17:41   ` Maarten Lankhorst
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ville Syrjälä @ 2017-06-01 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Maarten Lankhorst; +Cc: intel-gfx

On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 12:34:13PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Seems that GLK has a dotclock that's twice the display clock.
> skl_max_scale checks for IS_GEMINILAKE, so perform the same check here.
> 
> While at it, change the DRM_ERROR to DEBUG_KMS.
> 
> Fixes: 73b0ca8ec76d ("drm/i915/skl+: consider max supported plane pixel
> rate while scaling")
> Cc: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 12 ++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index 2042f6512e6e..88c8a3511e24 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>  	struct drm_plane *plane;
>  	const struct drm_plane_state *pstate;
>  	struct intel_plane_state *intel_pstate;
> -	int crtc_clock, cdclk;
> +	int crtc_clock, dotclk;
>  	uint32_t pipe_max_pixel_rate;
>  	uint_fixed_16_16_t pipe_downscale;
>  	uint_fixed_16_16_t max_downscale = u32_to_fixed_16_16(1);
> @@ -4157,11 +4157,15 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>  	pipe_downscale = mul_fixed16(pipe_downscale, max_downscale);
>  
>  	crtc_clock = crtc_state->adjusted_mode.crtc_clock;
> -	cdclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
> -	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(cdclk, pipe_downscale);
> +	dotclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;

dotclk = cdclk. That statement doesn't make sense. It should be called
max_dotclk or something like that.

> +
> +	if (IS_GEMINILAKE(to_i915(intel_crtc->base.dev)))
> +		dotclk *= 2;
> +
> +	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(dotclk, pipe_downscale);
>  
>  	if (pipe_max_pixel_rate < crtc_clock) {
> -		DRM_ERROR("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
> +		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Max supported pixel clock with scaling exceeded\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate
  2017-06-01 13:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
@ 2017-06-01 17:41   ` Maarten Lankhorst
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Maarten Lankhorst @ 2017-06-01 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ville Syrjälä; +Cc: intel-gfx

Op 01-06-17 om 15:52 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 12:34:13PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Seems that GLK has a dotclock that's twice the display clock.
>> skl_max_scale checks for IS_GEMINILAKE, so perform the same check here.
>>
>> While at it, change the DRM_ERROR to DEBUG_KMS.
>>
>> Fixes: 73b0ca8ec76d ("drm/i915/skl+: consider max supported plane pixel
>> rate while scaling")
>> Cc: Mahesh Kumar <mahesh1.kumar@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 12 ++++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> index 2042f6512e6e..88c8a3511e24 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> @@ -4122,7 +4122,7 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>>  	struct drm_plane *plane;
>>  	const struct drm_plane_state *pstate;
>>  	struct intel_plane_state *intel_pstate;
>> -	int crtc_clock, cdclk;
>> +	int crtc_clock, dotclk;
>>  	uint32_t pipe_max_pixel_rate;
>>  	uint_fixed_16_16_t pipe_downscale;
>>  	uint_fixed_16_16_t max_downscale = u32_to_fixed_16_16(1);
>> @@ -4157,11 +4157,15 @@ int skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc,
>>  	pipe_downscale = mul_fixed16(pipe_downscale, max_downscale);
>>  
>>  	crtc_clock = crtc_state->adjusted_mode.crtc_clock;
>> -	cdclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
>> -	pipe_max_pixel_rate = div_round_up_u32_fixed16(cdclk, pipe_downscale);
>> +	dotclk = to_intel_atomic_state(state)->cdclk.logical.cdclk;
> dotclk = cdclk. That statement doesn't make sense. It should be called
> max_dotclk or something like that.
R-B if you want to rename it to max_dotclk. :)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2017-06-01 17:42 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-06-01 10:34 [PATCH] drm/i915/glk: Fix dotclock calculation in skl_check_pipe_max_pixel_rate Maarten Lankhorst
2017-06-01 10:50 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2017-06-01 10:52 ` [PATCH] " Mahesh Kumar
2017-06-01 10:54   ` Maarten Lankhorst
2017-06-01 13:52 ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-06-01 17:41   ` Maarten Lankhorst

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.