[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 09/11] drm/i915/gen9+: Program watermarks as a separate step during evasion, v2.

[Maarten Lankhorst]

Op 27-10-16 om 01:24 schreef Matt Roper:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 03:41:37PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> The watermark updates for SKL style watermarks are no longer done
>> in the plane callbacks, but are now called in a separate watermark
>> update function that's called during the same vblank evasion,
>> before the plane updates.
>>
>> This also gets rid of the global skl_results, which was required for
>> keeping track of the current atomic commit.
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>> - Move line unwrap to correct patch. (Lyude)
>> - Make sure we don't regress ILK watermarks. (Matt)
>> - Rephrase commit message. (Matt)
>>
> ...
>> @@ -14459,8 +14436,17 @@ static void intel_atomic_commit_tail(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>>  			intel_check_cpu_fifo_underruns(dev_priv);
>>  			intel_check_pch_fifo_underruns(dev_priv);
>>  
>> -			if (!crtc->state->active)
>> -				intel_update_watermarks(crtc);
>> +			if (!crtc->state->active) {
>> +				/*
>> +				 * Make sure we don't call initial_watermarks
>> +				 * for ILK-style watermark updates.
>> +				 */
>> +				if (HAS_DDI(dev_priv) && dev_priv->display.initial_watermarks)
> Aren't HSW/BDW DDI platforms?  They still use the ILK-style watermarks,
> so I don't think this is protecting all the platforms it needs to.
>
> Even if that weren't the case, I wouldn't be wild about using HAS_DDI
> here since whether or not a platform has DDI isn't really the reason
> we're programming watermarks differently so the code is a bit confusing
> to the casual reader.
Oh right, completely forgot about that.

Maybe change the check to if dev_priv->atomic_update_watermarks ?

~Maarten