Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Prefer CRTC 'active' rather than 'enabled' during WM computations

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:58:40PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri,  7 Dec 2012 10:43:25 +0000
> Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Only the intel_crtc->active is accurate at the point where we wish to
> > perform WM computations, so use it instead of crtc->enabled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c |   14 +++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > index 3eb21fa..07e0a2f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ void intel_update_fbc(struct drm_device *dev)
> >  	 *   - going to an unsupported config (interlace, pixel multiply, etc.)
> >  	 */
> >  	list_for_each_entry(tmp_crtc, &dev->mode_config.crtc_list, head) {
> > -		if (tmp_crtc->enabled &&
> > +		if (to_intel_crtc(tmp_crtc)->active &&
> >  		    !to_intel_crtc(tmp_crtc)->primary_disabled &&
> >  		    tmp_crtc->fb) {
> >  			if (crtc) {
> > @@ -995,7 +995,7 @@ static struct drm_crtc *single_enabled_crtc(struct drm_device *dev)
> >  	struct drm_crtc *crtc, *enabled = NULL;
> >  
> >  	list_for_each_entry(crtc, &dev->mode_config.crtc_list, head) {
> > -		if (crtc->enabled && crtc->fb) {
> > +		if (to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active && crtc->fb) {
> >  			if (enabled)
> >  				return NULL;
> >  			enabled = crtc;
> > @@ -1089,7 +1089,7 @@ static bool g4x_compute_wm0(struct drm_device *dev,
> >  	int entries, tlb_miss;
> >  
> >  	crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_plane(dev, plane);
> > -	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !crtc->enabled) {
> > +	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active) {
> >  		*cursor_wm = cursor->guard_size;
> >  		*plane_wm = display->guard_size;
> >  		return false;
> > @@ -1218,7 +1218,7 @@ static bool vlv_compute_drain_latency(struct drm_device *dev,
> >  	int entries;
> >  
> >  	crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_plane(dev, plane);
> > -	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !crtc->enabled)
> > +	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active)
> >  		return false;
> >  
> >  	clock = crtc->mode.clock;	/* VESA DOT Clock */
> > @@ -1479,7 +1479,7 @@ static void i9xx_update_wm(struct drm_device *dev)
> >  
> >  	fifo_size = dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size(dev, 0);
> >  	crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_plane(dev, 0);
> > -	if (crtc->enabled && crtc->fb) {
> > +	if (to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active && crtc->fb) {
> >  		int cpp = crtc->fb->bits_per_pixel / 8;
> >  		if (IS_GEN2(dev))
> >  			cpp = 4;
> > @@ -1493,7 +1493,7 @@ static void i9xx_update_wm(struct drm_device *dev)
> >  
> >  	fifo_size = dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size(dev, 1);
> >  	crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_plane(dev, 1);
> > -	if (crtc->enabled && crtc->fb) {
> > +	if (to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active && crtc->fb) {
> >  		int cpp = crtc->fb->bits_per_pixel / 8;
> >  		if (IS_GEN2(dev))
> >  			cpp = 4;
> > @@ -2047,7 +2047,7 @@ sandybridge_compute_sprite_wm(struct drm_device *dev, int plane,
> >  	int entries, tlb_miss;
> >  
> >  	crtc = intel_get_crtc_for_plane(dev, plane);
> > -	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !crtc->enabled) {
> > +	if (crtc->fb == NULL || !to_intel_crtc(crtc)->active) {
> >  		*sprite_wm = display->guard_size;
> >  		return false;
> >  	}
> 
> Our wm code was never very pretty since it didn't fit in very well with
> the modesetting code structure... can we make it cleaner now and remove
> all this duplication?
> 
> Definitely not something for this patch, just an observation.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>

Both patches applied to -fixes, thanks.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch