[PATCH 1/8] drm/msm/dpu: link DSPP_2/_3 blocks on SM8150

[Abhinav Kumar]

On 12/16/2024 2:21 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 01:11:35PM -0800, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/16/2024 12:27 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> Link DSPP_2 to the LM_2 and DSPP_3 to the LM_3 mixer blocks.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 05ae91d960fd ("drm/msm/dpu: enable DSPP support on SM8[12]50")
>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h | 2 ++
>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> Change looks fine
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk at quicinc.com>
>>
>> One question below (not tied to the change but arose due to it):
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h
>>> index 6ccfde82fecdb4e3612df161814b16f7af40ca5f..421afacb7248039abd9fb66bcb73b756ae0d640a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h
>>> @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ static const struct dpu_lm_cfg sm8150_lm[] = {
>>>    		.sblk = &sdm845_lm_sblk,
>>>    		.lm_pair = LM_3,
>>>    		.pingpong = PINGPONG_2,
>>> +		.dspp = DSPP_2,
>>>    	}, {
>>>    		.name = "lm_3", .id = LM_3,
>>>    		.base = 0x47000, .len = 0x320,
>>> @@ -171,6 +172,7 @@ static const struct dpu_lm_cfg sm8150_lm[] = {
>>>    		.sblk = &sdm845_lm_sblk,
>>>    		.lm_pair = LM_2,
>>>    		.pingpong = PINGPONG_3,
>>> +		.dspp = DSPP_3,
>>>    	}, {
>>>    		.name = "lm_4", .id = LM_4,
>>>    		.base = 0x48000, .len = 0x320,
>>>
>>
>> the consumer of .dspp seems to be in the RM code which is used to map the
>> DSPP to encoder_id but is there really any case where lm_id != dspp_id ... I
>> guess I am missing the context of why DSPP id needs to be tracked as LMs and
>> DSPPs go together. Let me also check this part internally.
> 
> For example check the SDM845, the LM_5 is tied to DSPP_3.
> 
> LM | DSPP
> ---------
> 0  |  0
> 1  |  1
> 2  |  2
> 5  |  3
> 

Ah ... yes ... seems like sdm845 is the only one having this anomaly.

Thanks for clarifying.