intel-gfx.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: "Lisovskiy, Stanislav" <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix dbuf slice mask when turning off all the pipes
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 09:33:29 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200518063329.GR6112@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200517121234.GA7704@intel.com>

On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 03:12:49PM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 07:15:42PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > The current dbuf slice computation only happens when there are
> > active pipes. If we are turning off all the pipes we just leave
> > the dbuf slice mask at it's previous value, which may be something
> > other that BIT(S1). If runtime PM will kick in it will however
> > turn off everything but S1. Then on the next atomic commit (if
> > the new dbuf slice mask matches the stale value we left behind)
> > the code will not turn on the other slices we now need. This will
> > lead to underruns as the planes are trying to use a dbuf slice
> > that's not powered up.
> > 
> > To work around let's just just explicitly set the dbuf slice mask
> > to BIT(S1) when we are turning off all the pipes. Really the code
> > should just calculate this stuff the same way regardless whether
> > the pipes are on or off, but we're not quite there yet (need a
> > bit more work on the dbuf state for that).
> > 
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > Fixes: 3cf43cdc63fb ("drm/i915: Introduce proper dbuf state")
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > index a21e36ed1a77..4a523d8b881f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > @@ -4071,6 +4071,22 @@ skl_ddb_get_pipe_allocation_limits(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >  	*num_active = hweight8(active_pipes);
> >  
> >  	if (!crtc_state->hw.active) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * FIXME hack to make sure we compute this sensibly when
> > +		 * turning off all the pipes. Otherwise we leave it at
> > +		 * whatever we had previously, and then runtime PM will
> > +		 * mess it up by turning off all but S1. Remove this
> > +		 * once the dbuf state computation flow becomes sane.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (active_pipes == 0) {
> > +			new_dbuf_state->enabled_slices = BIT(DBUF_S1);
> > +
> > +			if (old_dbuf_state->enabled_slices != new_dbuf_state->enabled_slices) {
> > +				ret = intel_atomic_serialize_global_state(&new_dbuf_state->base);
> > +				if (ret)
> > +					return ret;
> > +			}
> > +		}
> 
> Rather weird, why we didnt have that issue before..
> Just trying to figure out what's the reason - aren't we recovering the last
> state of enabled slices from hw in gen9_dbuf_enable?
> 
> As I understand you modify enabled_slices in dbuf global object recovering
> the actual hw state there. 
> 
> Also from your patches I don't see the actual logic difference with what 
> was happening before dbuf_state in that sense.
> I.e we were also bailing out in skl_get_pipe_alloc_limits, without modifying
> dbuf_state before, however there was no issue.

We didn't have the old state so the pre/post update hooks were comparing
the new value against the value that was mangled by the display core init
to match the actual hw state.

The reason why it bit tgl so hard is that we tend to use two slices
on tgl all the time, whereas on icl we use just the first slice most
of the time.

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

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-18  6:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-16 16:15 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix dbuf slice mask when turning off all the pipes Ville Syrjala
2020-05-16 19:49 ` Chris Wilson
2020-05-17 12:12 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-05-18  6:33   ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2020-05-18 13:31     ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-05-18  9:05 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2020-05-18 10:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2020-05-18 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] " Ville Syrjala
2020-05-18 13:14   ` Chris Wilson
2020-05-18 18:01     ` Ville Syrjälä
2020-05-18 14:57 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Fix dbuf slice mask when turning off all the pipes (rev2) Patchwork
2020-05-18 17:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

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=20200518063329.GR6112@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=stanislav.lisovskiy@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).