[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a40c72c2-3483-020c-907e-6c7d84e88fbd@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 21:55:12 +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 20:45, Kuogee Hsieh wrote:
>
> On 5/2/2023 3:42 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> 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?
>>
> I think it only have two DSPP connect to pp blocks
So, can they be connected to PP3/4 or not?
>>> };
>>> 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists