[PATCH v4 3/7] drm/i915/scaler: Refactor max_scale computation
Nautiyal, Ankit K
ankit.k.nautiyal at intel.com
Mon Jan 13 08:29:31 UTC 2025
On 1/8/2025 6:05 PM, Mitul Golani wrote:
> Refactor max scaling factor computation into a reusable
> function for scalers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mitul Golani <mitulkumar.ajitkumar.golani at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c | 63 ++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> index 4f838220f880..19ab7b38c64e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c
> @@ -309,6 +309,37 @@ static int intel_allocate_scaler(struct intel_crtc_scaler_state *scaler_state,
> return -1;
> }
>
> +static void
> +calculate_max_scale(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> + bool is_yuv_semiplanar,
> + int scaler_id,
> + int *max_hscale, int *max_vscale)
> +{
> + struct intel_display *display = to_intel_display(crtc);
> +
> + /*
> + * FIXME: When two scalers are needed, but only one of
> + * them needs to downscale, we should make sure that
> + * the one that needs downscaling support is assigned
> + * as the first scaler, so we don't reject downscaling
> + * unnecessarily.
> + */
> + if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 14) {
> + *max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> +
> + if (scaler_id == 0)
> + *max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> + else
> + *max_vscale = 0x10000;
> + } else if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 10 || !is_yuv_semiplanar) {
> + *max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> + *max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> + } else {
> + *max_hscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> + *max_vscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> int num_scalers_need, struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> const char *name, int idx,
> @@ -378,35 +409,9 @@ static int intel_atomic_setup_scaler(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
> const struct drm_rect *dst = &plane_state->uapi.dst;
> int hscale, vscale, max_vscale, max_hscale;
>
> - /*
> - * FIXME: When two scalers are needed, but only one of
> - * them needs to downscale, we should make sure that
> - * the one that needs downscaling support is assigned
> - * as the first scaler, so we don't reject downscaling
> - * unnecessarily.
> - */
> -
> - if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 14) {
> - /*
> - * On versions 14 and up, only the first
> - * scaler supports a vertical scaling factor
> - * of more than 1.0, while a horizontal
> - * scaling factor of 3.0 is supported.
> - */
> - max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> - if (*scaler_id == 0)
> - max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> - else
> - max_vscale = 0x10000;
This part seems to be removed. I don't see anything mentioned in the
commit message about this too.
If you are moving code to a new function, then it should be a simple
move, without any functional change.
Regards,
Ankit
> -
> - } else if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 10 ||
> - !intel_format_info_is_yuv_semiplanar(fb->format, fb->modifier)) {
> - max_hscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> - max_vscale = 0x30000 - 1;
> - } else {
> - max_hscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> - max_vscale = 0x20000 - 1;
> - }
> + calculate_max_scale(crtc,
> + intel_format_info_is_yuv_semiplanar(fb->format, fb->modifier),
> + *scaler_id, &max_hscale, &max_vscale);
>
> /*
> * FIXME: We should change the if-else block above to
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list