linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] drm/msm/dpu: add DPU_PINGPONG_DSC bits into PP_BLK and PP_BLK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 3 May 2023 01:42:10 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>,
        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, andersson@...nel.org
Cc:     quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, quic_sbillaka@...cinc.com,
        marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] drm/msm/dpu: add DPU_PINGPONG_DSC bits into PP_BLK
 and PP_BLK_TE marcos

On 03/05/2023 00:02, Kuogee Hsieh wrote:
> At legacy chipsets, it required DPU_PINGPONG_DSC bit be set to indicate
> pingpong ops functions are required to complete DSC data path setup if
> this chipset has DSC hardware block presented. This patch add
> DPU_PINGPONG_DSC bit to both PP_BLK and PP_BLK_TE marcos if it has DSC
> hardware block presented.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>
> ---
>   .../drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h    | 12 +++++-----
>   .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h |  8 +++----
>   .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h | 26 ++++++++++------------
>   .../drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_1_sc8180x.h    | 24 ++++++++++----------
>   .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_0_sm8250.h | 26 ++++++++++------------
>   .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_2_sc7180.h |  4 ++--
>   .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_3_sm6115.h |  2 +-
>   .../drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_5_qcm2290.h    |  2 +-
>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c     |  8 +++----
>   9 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h
> index 17f821c..b7cd746 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h
> @@ -112,16 +112,16 @@ static const struct dpu_lm_cfg msm8998_lm[] = {
>   };
>   
>   static const struct dpu_pingpong_cfg msm8998_pp[] = {
> -	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_0", PINGPONG_0, 0x70000, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
> -			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 8),
> +	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_0", PINGPONG_0, 0x70000, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0,
> +			sdm845_pp_sblk_te, DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 8),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 12)),
> -	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_1", PINGPONG_1, 0x70800, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
> -			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 9),
> +	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_1", PINGPONG_1, 0x70800, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0,
> +			sdm845_pp_sblk_te, DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 9),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 13)),
> -	PP_BLK("pingpong_2", PINGPONG_2, 0x71000, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
> +	PP_BLK("pingpong_2", PINGPONG_2, 0x71000, 0, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 10),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 14)),
> -	PP_BLK("pingpong_3", PINGPONG_3, 0x71800, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
> +	PP_BLK("pingpong_3", PINGPONG_3, 0x71800, 0, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 11),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 15)),

Just to doublecheck: why don't we have DPU_PINGPONG_DSC for PP_3/_4? We 
do have them on sdm845. Is it because we should not use DSC with thos 
PINGPONG blocks?

>   };
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h
> index ceca741..8888bd9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h
> @@ -110,16 +110,16 @@ static const struct dpu_lm_cfg sdm845_lm[] = {
>   };
>   
>   static const struct dpu_pingpong_cfg sdm845_pp[] = {
> -	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_0", PINGPONG_0, 0x70000, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
> +	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_0", PINGPONG_0, 0x70000, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 8),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 12)),
> -	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_1", PINGPONG_1, 0x70800, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
> +	PP_BLK_TE("pingpong_1", PINGPONG_1, 0x70800, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0, sdm845_pp_sblk_te,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 9),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 13)),
> -	PP_BLK("pingpong_2", PINGPONG_2, 0x71000, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
> +	PP_BLK("pingpong_2", PINGPONG_2, 0x71000, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 10),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 14)),
> -	PP_BLK("pingpong_3", PINGPONG_3, 0x71800, 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
> +	PP_BLK("pingpong_3", PINGPONG_3, 0x71800, BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DSC), 0, sdm845_pp_sblk,
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 11),
>   			DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 15)),
>

[skipped the rest, looks good to me]

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry