[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915/psr: Update PSR2 resolution check for Cannonlake

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 01:27:09PM -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> In fact, apply the Cannonlake resolution check for all >= Gen-10 platforms
> to be safe.
> 
> v2: Use local variables for resolution limits and print them (Ville)
> 
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> Cc: Elio Martinez Monroy <elio.martinez.monroy at intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> index 05770790a4e9..66d04a8dd99e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> @@ -451,8 +451,9 @@ static bool intel_psr2_config_valid(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>  {
>  	struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dig_port->base.base.dev);
> -	const struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode =
> -		&crtc_state->base.adjusted_mode;
> +	int crtc_h = crtc_state->base.adjusted_mode.crtc_hdisplay;
> +	int crtc_v = crtc_state->base.adjusted_mode.crtc_vdisplay;

I'd probably call these hdisp/vdisp or something like that. "crtc_h" makes
me think it's a height of a plane in crtc (pipe source) coordinates.

> +	int max_h, max_v;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * FIXME psr2_support is messed up. It's both computed
> @@ -462,10 +463,11 @@ static bool intel_psr2_config_valid(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>  	if (!dev_priv->psr.psr2_support)
>  		return false;
>  
> -	/* PSR2 is restricted to work with panel resolutions up to 3640x2304 */
> -	if (adjusted_mode->crtc_hdisplay > 3640 ||
> -	    adjusted_mode->crtc_vdisplay > 2304) {
> -		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR2 not enabled, panel resolution too big\n");
> +	max_h = INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 10 ? 4096 : 3640;
> +	max_v = 2304;

GLK should use the higher limit too no?

Looking at the *future* stuff for this it looks like we'll be getting
different limits again soon. So I'd prep for that day by making this 
a full blown if ladder from the start.

> +	if (crtc_h > max_h || crtc_v > max_v) {
> +		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR2 not enabled, resolution %dx%d > max supported %dx%d\n",
> +			      crtc_h, crtc_v, max_h, max_v);
>  		return false;
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.14.1

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC