[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/13] drm/i915/intel_cdclk: Add vdsc with bigjoiner constraints on min_cdlck
Nautiyal, Ankit K
ankit.k.nautiyal at intel.com
Thu May 18 13:14:33 UTC 2023
Thanks Ville and Stan for the comments.
I agree with the changes in _plane_min_cdclk and
intel_pixel_rate_to_cdclk regarding PPC.
But I am a little confused for about the pixel clock.
Please find my comments inline:
On 5/16/2023 3:41 PM, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 05:44:51PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:54:09AM +0530, Ankit Nautiyal wrote:
>>> As per Bsepc:49259, Bigjoiner BW check puts restriction on the
>>> compressed bpp for a given CDCLK, pixelclock in cases where
>>> Bigjoiner + DSC are used.
>>>
>>> Currently compressed bpp is computed first, and it is ensured that
>>> the bpp will work at least with the max CDCLK freq.
>>>
>>> Since the CDCLK is computed later, lets account for Bigjoiner BW
>>> check while calculating Min CDCLK.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal at intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
>>> index 6bed75f1541a..3532640c5027 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
>>> @@ -2520,6 +2520,46 @@ static int intel_planes_min_cdclk(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>> return min_cdclk;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int intel_vdsc_min_cdclk(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>> +{
>>> + struct intel_crtc *crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc_state->uapi.crtc);
>>> + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
>>> + int min_cdclk = 0;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * When we decide to use only one VDSC engine, since
>>> + * each VDSC operates with 1 ppc throughput, pixel clock
>>> + * cannot be higher than the VDSC clock (cdclk)
>>> + */
>>> + if (!crtc_state->dsc.dsc_split)
>>> + min_cdclk = max(min_cdclk, (int)crtc_state->pixel_rate);
>>> +
>>> + if (crtc_state->bigjoiner_pipes) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * According to Bigjoiner bw check:
>>> + * compressed_bpp <= PPC * CDCLK * Big joiner Interface bits / Pixel clock
>>> + *
>>> + * We have already computed compressed_bpp, so now compute the min CDCLK that
>>> + * is required to support this compressed_bpp.
>>> + *
>>> + * => CDCLK >= compressed_bpp * Pixel clock / (PPC * Bigjoiner Interface bits)
>>> + *
>>> + * Since Num of pipes joined = 2, and PPC = 2 with bigjoiner
>>> + * => CDCLK >= compressed_bpp * pixel_rate / Bigjoiner Interface bits
>>> + *
>>> + * #TODO Bspec mentions to account for FEC overhead while using pixel clock.
>>> + * Check if we need to use FEC overhead in the above calculations.
>>> + */
>>> + int bigjoiner_interface_bits = DISPLAY_VER(i915) > 13 ? 36 : 24;
>>> + int min_cdclk_bj = crtc_state->dsc.compressed_bpp * crtc_state->pixel_rate /
>>> + bigjoiner_interface_bits;
>> pixel_rate is the downscale adjusted thing, so it doesn't seem
>> like the correct thing to use here.
>>
>> Hmm. Assuming that the single VDSC engine really throttles the entire
>> pipe to 1 PPC then we should probably account for the 1 vs. 2 PPC
>> difference in *_plane_min_cdclk() and intel_pixel_rate_to_cdclk()
>> directly. Currently all of those assume 2 PPC.
Hmm alright, I do see in plane_min_cdclk and intel_pixel_rate_to_cdclk
we assume 2 PPC.
So I can add a check for the dsc_split and use 1 PPC/2PPC in the two
functions as a separate patch perhaps.
> Main thing is to properly align that one you propose above with that check,
> where we decide how many VDSC engines to use:
>
> /*
> * VDSC engine operates at 1 Pixel per clock, so if peak pixel rate
> * is greater than the maximum Cdclock and if slice count is even
> * then we need to use 2 VDSC instances.
> */
> if (adjusted_mode->crtc_clock > dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq) {
> if (pipe_config->dsc.slice_count > 1) {
> pipe_config->dsc.dsc_split = true;
> } else {
> drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm,
> "Cannot split stream to use 2 VDSC instances\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> }
>
> Otherwise I agree that we should do that check preferrably in *_plane_min_cdclk
> and use plane data rate which is adjusted after scaling is applied(I think we even have correspondent function there)
> It is strange that scaling wasn't mentioned in BSpec formula.
> I would also say that we should account for number of slices(i.e VDSC engines) now only in Bigjoiner case, but always, as I understand that number can be different not only for Bigjoiner cases.
>
> Stan
>
Hmm does it mean:
if (!crtc_state->dsc.dsc_split) {
if (bigjoiner)
min_cdclk = compressed_bpp * Pixel clock / (PPC * Bigjoiner
Interface bits);
else
min_cdclk = compressed_bpp * Pixel clock;
}
For Pixel clock, should it not be crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode->clock ?
Regards,
Ankit
>>> +
>>> + min_cdclk = max(min_cdclk, min_cdclk_bj);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return min_cdclk;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> int intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>> {
>>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
>>> @@ -2591,13 +2631,8 @@ int intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>> /* Account for additional needs from the planes */
>>> min_cdclk = max(intel_planes_min_cdclk(crtc_state), min_cdclk);
>>>
>>> - /*
>>> - * When we decide to use only one VDSC engine, since
>>> - * each VDSC operates with 1 ppc throughput, pixel clock
>>> - * cannot be higher than the VDSC clock (cdclk)
>>> - */
>>> - if (crtc_state->dsc.compression_enable && !crtc_state->dsc.dsc_split)
>>> - min_cdclk = max(min_cdclk, (int)crtc_state->pixel_rate);
>>> + if (crtc_state->dsc.compression_enable)
>>> + min_cdclk = max(min_cdclk, intel_vdsc_min_cdclk(crtc_state));
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * HACK. Currently for TGL/DG2 platforms we calculate
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
>> --
>> Ville Syrjälä
>> Intel
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list