IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Workarounds are documented in the bspec with an exclusive upper bound
(i.e., a "fixed" stepping that no longer needs the workaround). This
makes our driver's use of an inclusive upper bound for stepping ranges
confusing; the differing notation between code and bspec makes it very
easy for mistakes to creep in.
Let's switch the upper bound of our IS_{GT,DISP}_STEP macros over to use
an exclusive upper bound like the bspec does. This also has the benefit
of helping make sure workarounds are properly handled for new minor
steppings that show up (e.g., an A1 between the A0 and B0 we already
knew about) --- if the new intermediate stepping pulls in hardware fixes
early, there will be an update to the workaround definition which lets
us know we need to change our code. If the new stepping does not pull a
hardware fix earlier, then the new stepping will already be captured
properly by the "[begin, fix)" range in the code.
We'll probably need to be extra vigilant in code review of new
workarounds for the near future to make sure developers notice the new
semantics of workaround bounds. But we just migrated a bunch of our
platforms from the IS_REVID bounds over to IS_{GT,DISP}_STEP, so people
are already adjusting to the new macros and now is a good time to make
this change too.
[mattrope: Split out display changes to apply through intel-next tree]
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210717051426.4120328-8-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
The switch from old old IS_FOO_REVID() macros to the new table-based
IS_FOO_{GT,DISP}_STEP() macros is needed on both drm-intel-next (for
display-based DMC matching) and drm-intel-gt-next (for workaround
guards). To avoid conflicts, we'll apply the patches to a topic branch
and merge it to both intel branches to ensure the transition to the
new macros is clean.
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
This introduces the following function that can exit and activate a psr
source when intel_psr is already enabled.
- intel_psr_pause(): Pause current PSR. It deactivates current psr state.
- intel_psr_resume(): Resume paused PSR. It activates paused psr state.
v2: Address Jose's review comment.
- Remove unneeded changes around the intel_psr_enable().
- Add intel_psr_post_exit() which processes waiting until PSR is idle
and WA for SelectiveFetch.
v3: Address Jose's review comment.
- Rename intel_psr_post_exit() to intel_psr_wait_exit_locked().
- Move WA_1408330847 to intel_psr_disable_locked()
- If the PSR is paused by an explicit intel_psr_paused() call, make the
intel_psr_flush() not to activate PSR.
v4: Address Jose's review comment.
- In order to avoid the scenario of PSR is not active but there is a
scheduled psr->work, it changes the check routine of intel_psr_pause()
for PSR's enablement from "psr->active" to "psr->enable".
Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210608085415.515342-1-gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com
Hoist the intel_de.h include from intel_display_types.h one
level up. I need this in order to untangle the include order
so that I can add tracepoints into intel_de.h.
This little cocci script did most of the work for me:
@find@
@@
(
intel_de_read(...)
|
intel_de_read_fw(...)
|
intel_de_write(...)
|
intel_de_write_fw(...)
)
@has_include@
@@
(
#include "intel_de.h"
|
#include "display/intel_de.h"
)
@depends on find && !has_include@
@@
+ #include "intel_de.h"
#include "intel_display_types.h"
@depends on find && !has_include@
@@
+ #include "display/intel_de.h"
#include "display/intel_display_types.h"
Cc: Cooper Chiou <cooper.chiou@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210430143945.6776-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Gen to ver conversions across the driver
The main change is Lucas' series [1], with Ville's GLK fixes [2] and a
cherry-pick of Matt's commit [3] from drm-intel-next as a base to avoid
conflicts.
[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/88825/
[2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/88938/
[3] 70bfb30743 ("drm/i915/display: Eliminate IS_GEN9_{BC,LP}")
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
# Conflicts:
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_gmbus.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdmi.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c
# drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/878s5ebny0.fsf@intel.com
While converting the rest of the driver to use GRAPHICS_VER() and
MEDIA_VER(), following what was done for display, some discussions went
back on what we did for display:
1) Why is the == comparison special that deserves a separate
macro instead of just getting the version and comparing directly
like is done for >, >=, <=?
2) IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() is weird in that it omits the "_VER" for
brevity. If we remove the current users of IS_DISPLAY_VER(), we
could actually repurpose it for a range check
With (1) there could be an advantage if we used gen_mask since multiple
conditionals be combined by the compiler in a single and instruction and
check the result. However a) INTEL_GEN() doesn't use the mask since it
would make the code bigger everywhere else and b) in the cases it made
sense, it also made sense to convert to the _RANGE() variant.
So here we repurpose IS_DISPLAY_VER() to work with a [ from, to ] range
like was the IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() and convert the current IS_DISPLAY_VER()
users to use == and != operators. Aside from the definition changes,
this was done by the following semantic patch:
@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
- !IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) != E1
@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
- IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == E1
@@ expression dev_priv, from, until; @@
- IS_DISPLAY_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, from, until)
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
[Jani: Minor conflict resolve while applying.]
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210413051002.92589-4-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
Use Coccinelle to convert most of the usage of INTEL_GEN() and IS_GEN()
in the display code to use DISPLAY_VER() comparisons instead. The
following semantic patch was used:
@@ expression dev_priv, E; @@
- INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) == E
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E)
@@ expression dev_priv; @@
- INTEL_GEN(dev_priv)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv)
@@ expression dev_priv; expression E; @@
- IS_GEN(dev_priv, E)
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E)
@@
expression dev_priv;
expression from, until;
@@
- IS_GEN_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
+ IS_DISPLAY_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
There are still some display-related uses of INTEL_GEN() in intel_pm.c
(watermark code) and i915_irq.c. Those will be updated separately.
v2:
- Use new IS_DISPLAY_RANGE and IS_DISPLAY_VER helpers. (Jani)
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210320044245.3920043-4-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
Even though GEN12+ HW supports PSR + DC3CO, DMC's HW DC3CO exit mechanism
has an issue with using of Selective Fecth and PSR2 manual tracking.
And as some GEN12+ platforms (RKL, ADL-S) don't support PSR2 HW tracking,
Selective Fetch will be enabled by default on that platforms.
Therefore if the system enables PSR Selective Fetch / PSR manual tracking,
it does not allow DC3CO dc state, in that case.
When this DC3CO exit issue is addressed while PSR Selective Fetch is
enabled, this restriction should be removed.
v2: Address Jose's review comment.
- Fix typo
- Move check routine of DC3CO ability to
tgl_dc3co_exitline_compute_config()
v3: Change the check routine of enablement of psr2 sel fetch. (Jose)
Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210222213006.1609085-1-gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com
There is no support for two pipes one transcoder for PSR and if we had
that the current code should not use cpu_transcoder.
Also I can't see a scenario where crtc_state->enable_psr2_sel_fetch is
set and PSR is not enabled and if by a bug it happens PSR HW will just
ignore any value in set in PSR2_MAN_TRK_CTL.
So dropping all the rest and keeping the same behavior that we have
with intel_psr2_program_plane_sel_fetch().
Cc: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210209181439.215104-2-jose.souza@intel.com
It is a preliminary work for supporting multiple EDP PSR and
DP PanelReplay. And it refactors singleton PSR to Multi Transcoder
supportable PSR.
And this moves and renames the i915_psr structure of drm_i915_private's to
intel_dp's intel_psr structure.
It also causes changes in PSR interrupt handling routine for supporting
multiple transcoders. But it does not change the scenario and timing of
enabling and disabling PSR. And it not support multiple pipes with
a single transcoder PSR case yet.
v2: Fix indentation and add comments
v3: Remove Blank line
v4: Rebased
v5: Rebased and Addressed Anshuman's review comment.
- Move calling of intel_psr_init() to intel_dp_init_connector()
v6: Address Anshuman's review comments
- Remove wrong comments and add comments for a limit of supporting of
a single pipe PSR
v7: Update intel_psr_compute_config() for supporting multiple transcoder
PSR on BDW+
v8: Address Anshuman's review comments
- Replace DRM_DEBUG_KMS with drm_dbg_kms() / DRM_WARN with drm_warn()
v9: Fix commit message
v10: Rebased
v11: Address Jose's review comment.
- Reorder calling order of intel_psr2_program_trans_man_trk_ctl().
- In order to reduce changes keep the old name for drm_i915_private.
- Change restrictions of multiple instances of PSR.
v12: Address Jose's review comment.
- Change the calling of intel_psr2_program_trans_man_trk_ctl() into
commit_pipe_config().
- Change a checking order of CAN_PSR() and connector_status to original
on i915_psr_sink_status_show().
- Drop unneeded intel_dp_update_pipe() function.
- In order to wait a specific encoder which belong to crtc_state on
intel_psr_wait_for_idle(), add checking of encoder.
- Add an whitespace to comments.
v13: Rebased and Address Jose's review comment.
- Add and use for_each_intel_psr_enabled_encoder() macro.
- In order to use correct frontbuffer_bit for each pipe,
fix intel_psr_invalidate() and intel_psr_flush().
- Remove redundant or unneeded codes.
- Update comments.
v14: Address Jose's review comment
- Add and use for_each_intel_encoder_can_psr() macro and
for_each_intel_encoder_mask_can_psr() macro.
- Add source_support member variable into intel_psr structure.
- Update CAN_PSR() macro that checks source_support.
- Move encoder's PSR availity check to psr_init() from
psr_compute_config().
- Remove redundant or unneeded codes.
v15: Remove wrong mutex lock/unlock of PSR from
intel_psr2_program_trans_man_trk_ctl()
Signed-off-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Cc: Juha-Pekka Heikkila <juhapekka.heikkila@gmail.com>
Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210204134015.419036-1-gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com
This reverts commit 0883ce8146. Originally
these quirks were added because of the issues with using the eDP
backlight interfaces on certain laptop panels, which made it impossible
to properly probe for DPCD backlight support without having a whitelist
for panels that we know have working VESA backlight control interfaces
over DPCD. As well, it should be noted it was impossible to use the
normal sink OUI for recognizing these panels as none of them actually
filled out their OUIs, hence needing to resort to checking EDIDs.
At the time we weren't really sure why certain panels had issues with
DPCD backlight controls, but we eventually figured out that there was a
second interface that these problematic laptop panels actually did work
with and advertise properly: Intel's proprietary backlight interface for
HDR panels. So far the testing we've done hasn't brought any panels to
light that advertise this interface and don't support it properly, which
means we finally have a real solution to this problem.
As a result, we now have no need for the force DPCD backlight quirk, and
furthermore this also removes the need for any kind of EDID quirk
checking in DRM. So, let's just revert it for now since we were the only
driver using this.
v3:
* Rebase
v2:
* Fix indenting error picked up by checkpatch in
intel_edp_init_connector()
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: thaytan@noraisin.net
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210114221709.2261452-6-lyude@redhat.com
Now using plane damage clips property to calcualte the damaged area.
Selective fetch only supports one region to be fetched so software
needs to calculate a bounding box around all damage clips.
Now that we are not complete fetching each plane, there is another
loop needed as all the plane areas that intersect with the pipe
damaged area needs to be fetched from memory so the complete blending
of all planes can happen.
v2:
- do not shifting new_plane_state->uapi.dst only src is in 16.16 format
v4:
- setting plane selective fetch area using the whole pipe damage area
- mark the whole plane area damaged if plane visibility or alpha
changed
v5:
- taking in consideration src.y1 in the damage coordinates
- adding to the pipe damaged area planes that were visible but are
invisible in the new state
v6:
- consider old state plane coordinates when visibility changes or it
moved to calculate damaged area
- remove from damaged area the portion not in src clip
v7:
- intersec every damage clip with src to minimize damaged area
v8:
- adjust pipe_damaged area to 4 lines grouping
- adjust calculation now that is understood that uapi.src is the
framebuffer coordinates that plane will start to fetch from
v9:
- Only add plane dst or src to damaged_area if visible
- Early skip plane damage calculation if it was not visible in old and
new state
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210104205654.238928-2-jose.souza@intel.com
