From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] drm/i915: Rework watermark readout to use plane api
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:33:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024143328.GC1208@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191024124805.26840-1-maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 02:47:52PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of unconditionally verifying the cursor plane, handle it in the
> same way as any other plane, and use our existing api to verify.
>
> While at it, ensure that on gen9+ we verify active_planes mask as well.
> This should give the correct results for planar YUV planes too, as we
> update active_planes for them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 83 ++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index 579655675b08..4e4273c4ae57 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -13183,7 +13183,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> struct skl_pipe_wm *sw_wm;
> struct skl_ddb_entry *hw_ddb_entry, *sw_ddb_entry;
> const enum pipe pipe = crtc->pipe;
> - int plane, level, max_level = ilk_wm_max_level(dev_priv);
> + int level, max_level = ilk_wm_max_level(dev_priv);
> + struct intel_plane *plane;
>
> if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 9 || !new_crtc_state->base.active)
> return;
> @@ -13207,63 +13208,25 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> hw->ddb.enabled_slices);
>
> /* planes */
> - for_each_universal_plane(dev_priv, pipe, plane) {
> + for_each_intel_plane_on_crtc(&dev_priv->drm, crtc, plane) {
> struct skl_plane_wm *hw_plane_wm, *sw_plane_wm;
> + enum pipe plane_pipe = pipe;
>
> - hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[plane];
> - sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[plane];
> -
> - /* Watermarks */
> - for (level = 0; level <= max_level; level++) {
> - if (skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->wm[level],
> - &sw_plane_wm->wm[level]))
> - continue;
> -
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c plane %d level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1, level,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l);
> - }
> + hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[plane->id];
> + sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[plane->id];
>
> - if (!skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->trans_wm,
> - &sw_plane_wm->trans_wm)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c plane %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l);
> - }
> -
> - /* DDB */
> - hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[plane];
> - sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[plane];
> -
> - if (!skl_ddb_entry_equal(hw_ddb_entry, sw_ddb_entry)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c plane %d (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1,
> - sw_ddb_entry->start, sw_ddb_entry->end,
> - hw_ddb_entry->start, hw_ddb_entry->end);
> + if (!plane->get_hw_state(plane, &plane_pipe)) {
> + WARN(new_crtc_state->active_planes & BIT(plane->id),
> + "pipe %c %s should be visible, but isn't\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name);
> + continue;
> }
As mentioned the idea was to make sure we validate this stuff even for
disabled planes. A bit of paranoia is good since ddb overlaps can be
so dangerous. So I don't want such a check in this function.
> - }
>
> - /*
> - * cursor
> - * If the cursor plane isn't active, we may not have updated it's ddb
> - * allocation. In that case since the ddb allocation will be updated
> - * once the plane becomes visible, we can skip this check
> - */
> - if (1) {
> - struct skl_plane_wm *hw_plane_wm, *sw_plane_wm;
> + WARN_ON(plane_pipe != pipe);
>
> - hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[PLANE_CURSOR];
> - sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[PLANE_CURSOR];
> + WARN(!(new_crtc_state->active_planes & BIT(plane->id)),
> + "pipe %c %s should be invisible, but visible.\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name);
Still the wrong place for it.
>
> /* Watermarks */
> for (level = 0; level <= max_level; level++) {
> @@ -13271,8 +13234,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> &sw_plane_wm->wm[level]))
> continue;
>
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c cursor level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), level,
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c %s level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name, level,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l,
> @@ -13283,8 +13246,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
>
> if (!skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->trans_wm,
> &sw_plane_wm->trans_wm)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c cursor (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe),
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c %s (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l,
> @@ -13294,12 +13257,12 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> }
>
> /* DDB */
> - hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[PLANE_CURSOR];
> - sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[PLANE_CURSOR];
> + hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[plane->id];
> + sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[plane->id];
>
> if (!skl_ddb_entry_equal(hw_ddb_entry, sw_ddb_entry)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c cursor (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe),
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c %s (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name,
> sw_ddb_entry->start, sw_ddb_entry->end,
> hw_ddb_entry->start, hw_ddb_entry->end);
> }
> --
> 2.23.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/14] drm/i915: Rework watermark readout to use plane api
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:33:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024143328.GC1208@intel.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20191024143328.jooRYZtE0xyZ9zUs9y_JuP8X9o6ULple2HMjvToN5K4@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191024124805.26840-1-maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 02:47:52PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of unconditionally verifying the cursor plane, handle it in the
> same way as any other plane, and use our existing api to verify.
>
> While at it, ensure that on gen9+ we verify active_planes mask as well.
> This should give the correct results for planar YUV planes too, as we
> update active_planes for them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 83 ++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index 579655675b08..4e4273c4ae57 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -13183,7 +13183,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> struct skl_pipe_wm *sw_wm;
> struct skl_ddb_entry *hw_ddb_entry, *sw_ddb_entry;
> const enum pipe pipe = crtc->pipe;
> - int plane, level, max_level = ilk_wm_max_level(dev_priv);
> + int level, max_level = ilk_wm_max_level(dev_priv);
> + struct intel_plane *plane;
>
> if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) < 9 || !new_crtc_state->base.active)
> return;
> @@ -13207,63 +13208,25 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> hw->ddb.enabled_slices);
>
> /* planes */
> - for_each_universal_plane(dev_priv, pipe, plane) {
> + for_each_intel_plane_on_crtc(&dev_priv->drm, crtc, plane) {
> struct skl_plane_wm *hw_plane_wm, *sw_plane_wm;
> + enum pipe plane_pipe = pipe;
>
> - hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[plane];
> - sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[plane];
> -
> - /* Watermarks */
> - for (level = 0; level <= max_level; level++) {
> - if (skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->wm[level],
> - &sw_plane_wm->wm[level]))
> - continue;
> -
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c plane %d level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1, level,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> - sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> - hw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l);
> - }
> + hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[plane->id];
> + sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[plane->id];
>
> - if (!skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->trans_wm,
> - &sw_plane_wm->trans_wm)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c plane %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> - sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> - hw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l);
> - }
> -
> - /* DDB */
> - hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[plane];
> - sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[plane];
> -
> - if (!skl_ddb_entry_equal(hw_ddb_entry, sw_ddb_entry)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c plane %d (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), plane + 1,
> - sw_ddb_entry->start, sw_ddb_entry->end,
> - hw_ddb_entry->start, hw_ddb_entry->end);
> + if (!plane->get_hw_state(plane, &plane_pipe)) {
> + WARN(new_crtc_state->active_planes & BIT(plane->id),
> + "pipe %c %s should be visible, but isn't\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name);
> + continue;
> }
As mentioned the idea was to make sure we validate this stuff even for
disabled planes. A bit of paranoia is good since ddb overlaps can be
so dangerous. So I don't want such a check in this function.
> - }
>
> - /*
> - * cursor
> - * If the cursor plane isn't active, we may not have updated it's ddb
> - * allocation. In that case since the ddb allocation will be updated
> - * once the plane becomes visible, we can skip this check
> - */
> - if (1) {
> - struct skl_plane_wm *hw_plane_wm, *sw_plane_wm;
> + WARN_ON(plane_pipe != pipe);
>
> - hw_plane_wm = &hw->wm.planes[PLANE_CURSOR];
> - sw_plane_wm = &sw_wm->planes[PLANE_CURSOR];
> + WARN(!(new_crtc_state->active_planes & BIT(plane->id)),
> + "pipe %c %s should be invisible, but visible.\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name);
Still the wrong place for it.
>
> /* Watermarks */
> for (level = 0; level <= max_level; level++) {
> @@ -13271,8 +13234,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> &sw_plane_wm->wm[level]))
> continue;
>
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c cursor level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe), level,
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in WM pipe %c %s level %d (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name, level,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_en,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_b,
> sw_plane_wm->wm[level].plane_res_l,
> @@ -13283,8 +13246,8 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
>
> if (!skl_wm_level_equals(&hw_plane_wm->trans_wm,
> &sw_plane_wm->trans_wm)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c cursor (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe),
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in trans WM pipe %c %s (expected e=%d b=%u l=%u, got e=%d b=%u l=%u)\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_en,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_b,
> sw_plane_wm->trans_wm.plane_res_l,
> @@ -13294,12 +13257,12 @@ static void verify_wm_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> }
>
> /* DDB */
> - hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[PLANE_CURSOR];
> - sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[PLANE_CURSOR];
> + hw_ddb_entry = &hw->ddb_y[plane->id];
> + sw_ddb_entry = &new_crtc_state->wm.skl.plane_ddb_y[plane->id];
>
> if (!skl_ddb_entry_equal(hw_ddb_entry, sw_ddb_entry)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c cursor (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> - pipe_name(pipe),
> + DRM_ERROR("mismatch in DDB state pipe %c %s (expected (%u,%u), found (%u,%u))\n",
> + pipe_name(pipe), plane->base.name,
> sw_ddb_entry->start, sw_ddb_entry->end,
> hw_ddb_entry->start, hw_ddb_entry->end);
> }
> --
> 2.23.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-24 14:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-24 12:47 [PATCH 01/14] drm/i915: Rework watermark readout to use plane api Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 02/14] drm/i915: Introduce intel_atomic_get_plane_state_after_check(), v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 03/14] drm/i915: Handle a few more cases for crtc hw/uapi split, v3 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 04/14] drm/i915: Add aliases for uapi and hw to crtc_state Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 05/14] drm/i915: Perform manual conversions for crtc uapi/hw split, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 06/14] drm/i915: Perform automated conversions for crtc uapi/hw split, base -> hw Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 07/14] drm/i915: Perform automated conversions for crtc uapi/hw split, base -> uapi Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [PATCH 08/14] drm/i915: Complete crtc hw/uapi split, v3 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:47 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 15:21 ` Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-24 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-25 9:00 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-25 9:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-25 10:13 ` Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-25 10:13 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-28 9:20 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-28 9:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 09/14] drm/i915: Add aliases for uapi and hw to plane_state Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 10/14] drm/i915: Perform manual conversions for plane uapi/hw split Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 11/14] drm/i915: Perform automated conversions for plane uapi/hw split, base -> hw Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 12/14] drm/i915: Perform automated conversions for plane uapi/hw split, base -> uapi Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 13/14] drm/i915: Complete plane hw and uapi split, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [PATCH 14/14] drm/i915: Remove special case slave handling during hw programming, v3 Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 14:33 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2019-10-24 14:33 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/14] drm/i915: Rework watermark readout to use plane api Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-24 15:16 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 15:16 ` [Intel-gfx] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-24 18:26 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [01/14] " Patchwork
2019-10-24 18:26 ` [Intel-gfx] " Patchwork
2019-10-24 19:00 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2019-10-24 19:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-10-17 13:20 [PATCH 01/14] " Maarten Lankhorst
2019-10-17 13:37 ` Ville Syrjälä
2019-10-17 14:11 ` Maarten Lankhorst
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191024143328.GC1208@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.