[PATCH 5/6] drm/msm/dpu: use MDSS data for programming SSPP
Dmitry Baryshkov
dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org
Thu Jul 27 15:26:39 UTC 2023
On 27/07/2023 18:24, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On 7/27/2023 1:39 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 at 02:20, Abhinav Kumar
>> <quic_abhinavk at quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/21/2023 10:10 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> Switch to using data from MDSS driver to program the SSPP fetch and
>>>> UBWC
>>>> configuration.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.h | 7 +++++--
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.h | 1 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_rm.c | 3 ++-
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_rm.h | 2 ++
>>>> 6 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.c
>>>> index cf70a9bd1034..bfd82c2921af 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_sspp.c
>>>> @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
>>>> #include "dpu_hw_sspp.h"
>>>> #include "dpu_kms.h"
>>>>
>>>> +#include "msm_mdss.h"
>>>> +
>>>> #include <drm/drm_file.h>
>>>>
>>>> #define DPU_FETCH_CONFIG_RESET_VALUE 0x00000087
>>>> @@ -308,26 +310,26 @@ static void dpu_hw_sspp_setup_format(struct
>>>> dpu_sw_pipe *pipe,
>>>> DPU_REG_WRITE(c, SSPP_FETCH_CONFIG,
>>>> DPU_FETCH_CONFIG_RESET_VALUE |
>>>> ctx->ubwc->highest_bank_bit << 18);
>>>
>>> Does this needs to be protected with if ctx->ubwc check?
>>
>> Yes... And it should have been already.
>>
>>>
>>>> - switch (ctx->ubwc->ubwc_version) {
>>>> - case DPU_HW_UBWC_VER_10:
>>>> + switch (ctx->ubwc->ubwc_enc_version) {
>>>> + case UBWC_1_0:
>>>
>>> The values of UBWC_x_x dont match the values of DPU_HW_UBWC_VER_xx.
>>> What was the reason for the catalog to go with DPU_HW_UBWC_VER_xx in the
>>> catalog for the encoder version in the first place? Because looking at
>>> the registers UBWC_x_x is the correct value.
>>>
>>> If we cannot find the reason why, it should be noted in the commit text
>>> that the values we are using did change.
>>
>> Huh? This is just an enum. It isn't a part of uABI, nor it is written
>> to the hardware.
>>
>
> The reason is that, this switch case is moving from comparing one set of
> values to totally different ones. So atleast that should be noted.
>
> First thing that struck me was this point because the enums UBWC_x_x and
> DPU_HW_UBWC_VER_xx dont match.
>
Do you have any proposed text in mind?
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list