[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0a0c3a12-51e9-b0d0-9307-847023dbe1f7@quicinc.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 13:22:03 -0800
From: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>
To: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>
CC: <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <robdclark@...il.com>,
<sean@...rly.run>, <swboyd@...omium.org>, <dianders@...omium.org>,
<vkoul@...nel.org>, <daniel@...ll.ch>, <airlied@...il.com>,
<agross@...nel.org>, <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
<andersson@...nel.org>, <quic_sbillaka@...cinc.com>,
<freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 10/14] drm/msm/disp/dpu: add supports of DSC encoder
v1.2 engine
Hi Marijn
On 1/30/2023 12:16 PM, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> On 2023-01-24 15:52:46, Kuogee Hsieh wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> If only replying to a small chunk somewhere in the middle of a diff
> and/or large review, please cut out unnecessary bits to make your reply
> easier to find :)
>
>>>> + data = (dsc->flatness_min_qp & 0x1f);
>>>> + data |= (dsc->flatness_max_qp & 0x1f) << 5;
>>>> + data |= (dsc_info->det_thresh_flatness & 0xff) << 10;
>>> dpu_hw_dsc.c computes this on the fly. After removing that, and
>>> using initial_lines from the function parameters, only
>>> dsc_info->num_active_ss_per_enc remains. Do you really need that
>>> msm_display_dsc_info struct here, do you need it at all?
>>
>> I ported these code from our down stream code base.
>>
>> I make it work first, then clean it up will follow.
>>
>> I submit it for review since it looks like you guy like to have code sooner.
>
> Correct, I was looking forward to these patches albeit complete with the
> promised DSI support from Jessica, which still seems to be pending.
>
DSI support is still being worked upon.
I dont think we promised DSC 1.2 will come with DSI together in the same
series. It was always going to be DSC 1.2 + DP followed by another
series from Jessica for DSI.
Lets set the expectations right.
Thanks
Abhinav
> When sending patches to that extent, with the intent of getting quick
> turnaround but knowing that they are not ready for prime time yet (or
> were they, based on your "submit it for review" mention? Don't you mean
> testing?), please annotate the series with an RFC tag accompanied with a
> description what still needs to be done and why. That would have saved
> a great deal of comments and review.
>
>> yes, eliminate msm_display_dsc_info is my next target and hope it can be
>> done.
>
> Thank you. Again, if that was the intent from the get-go, that's
> perfect material to put in an RFC series' cover letter.
>
> - Marijn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists