From: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [Intel-gfx] [CI 15/18] drm/i915/dg2: Add dbuf programming
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:30:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210721223043.834562-16-matthew.d.roper@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210721223043.834562-1-matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
DG2 extends our DDB to four DBuf slices; pipes A+B only have access to
the first two slices, whereas pipes C+D only have access to the second
two.
Confusingly, our bspec decided to switch from 1-based numbering
of dbuf slices (S1, S2) to 0-based numbering (S0, S1, S2, S3) in
Display13. At the moment we're using the 0-based number scheme for the
DBUF_CTL_S() register addressing, but the 1-based number scheme in the
actual slice assignment tables. We may want to consider switching the
assignment over to 0-based numbering too at some point...
Bspec: 49255
Bspec: 50057
Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
---
.../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 4 +
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 120 +++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
index 22367b5cba96..ad788bbd727d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h
@@ -392,6 +392,10 @@ intel_display_power_put_all_in_set(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
intel_display_power_put_mask_in_set(i915, power_domain_set, power_domain_set->mask);
}
+/*
+ * FIXME: We should probably switch this to a 0-based scheme to be consistent
+ * with how we now name/number DBUF_CTL instances.
+ */
enum dbuf_slice {
DBUF_S1,
DBUF_S2,
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index 597383430ca6..aa64b2ef2efb 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -4584,6 +4584,117 @@ static const struct dbuf_slice_conf_entry tgl_allowed_dbufs[] =
{}
};
+static const struct dbuf_slice_conf_entry dg2_allowed_dbufs[] = {
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_B),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_B),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1),
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_C),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_C),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_C),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_C),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1),
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1),
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S3) | BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_C) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_C) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_C) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S1) | BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {
+ .active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A) | BIT(PIPE_B) | BIT(PIPE_C) | BIT(PIPE_D),
+ .dbuf_mask = {
+ [PIPE_A] = BIT(DBUF_S1),
+ [PIPE_B] = BIT(DBUF_S2),
+ [PIPE_C] = BIT(DBUF_S3),
+ [PIPE_D] = BIT(DBUF_S4),
+ },
+ },
+ {}
+};
+
static const struct dbuf_slice_conf_entry adlp_allowed_dbufs[] = {
{
.active_pipes = BIT(PIPE_A),
@@ -4759,12 +4870,19 @@ static u32 adlp_compute_dbuf_slices(enum pipe pipe, u32 active_pipes)
return compute_dbuf_slices(pipe, active_pipes, adlp_allowed_dbufs);
}
+static u32 dg2_compute_dbuf_slices(enum pipe pipe, u32 active_pipes)
+{
+ return compute_dbuf_slices(pipe, active_pipes, dg2_allowed_dbufs);
+}
+
static u8 skl_compute_dbuf_slices(struct intel_crtc *crtc, u8 active_pipes)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
enum pipe pipe = crtc->pipe;
- if (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(dev_priv))
+ if (IS_DG2(dev_priv))
+ return dg2_compute_dbuf_slices(pipe, active_pipes);
+ else if (IS_ALDERLAKE_P(dev_priv))
return adlp_compute_dbuf_slices(pipe, active_pipes);
else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == 12)
return tgl_compute_dbuf_slices(pipe, active_pipes);
--
2.25.4
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-21 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-21 22:30 [Intel-gfx] [CI 00/18] CI pass for reviewed Xe_HP SDV and DG2 patches Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 01/18] drm/i915: Add XE_HP initial definitions Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 02/18] drm/i915/xehpsdv: add initial XeHP SDV definitions Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 03/18] drm/i915/dg2: add DG2 platform info Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 04/18] drm/i915: Fork DG1 interrupt handler Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 05/18] drm/i915/xehp: VDBOX/VEBOX fusing registers are enable-based Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 06/18] drm/i915/gen12: Use fuse info to enable SFC Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 07/18] drm/i915/selftests: Allow for larger engine counts Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 08/18] drm/i915/xehp: Handle new device context ID format Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 09/18] drm/i915/xehp: New engine context offsets Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 10/18] drm/i915/dg2: Add fake PCH Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 11/18] drm/i915/dg2: Add cdclk table and reference clock Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 12/18] drm/i915/dg2: Skip shared DPLL handling Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 13/18] drm/i915/dg2: Don't wait for AUX power well enable ACKs Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 14/18] drm/i915/dg2: Setup display outputs Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` Matt Roper [this message]
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 16/18] drm/i915/dg2: Don't program BW_BUDDY registers Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 17/18] drm/i915/dg2: Don't read DRAM info Matt Roper
2021-07-21 22:30 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 18/18] drm/i915/dg2: DG2 has fixed memory bandwidth Matt Roper
2021-07-22 0:06 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for CI pass for reviewed Xe_HP SDV and DG2 patches Patchwork
2021-07-22 0:08 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-07-22 0:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-07-22 7:47 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-07-22 16:42 ` Matt Roper
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=20210721223043.834562-16-matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--to=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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).