On 9/16/2024 11:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 06:04:08PM GMT, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 9/2/2024 8:22 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
Historically CRTC resources (LMs and CTLs) were assigned in
dpu_crtc_atomic_begin(). The commit 9222cdd27e82 ("drm/msm/dpu: move hw
resource tracking to crtc state") simply moved resources to
struct dpu_crtc_state, without changing the code sequence. Later on the
commit b107603b4ad0 ("drm/msm/dpu: map mixer/ctl hw blocks in encoder
modeset") rearanged the code, but still kept the cstate->num_mixers
assignment to happen during commit phase. This makes dpu_crtc_state
inconsistent between consequent atomic_check() calls.
Move CRTC resource assignment to happen at the end of
dpu_encoder_virt_atomic_check().
Mostly LGTM now, a couple of comments/questions below:
Fixes: b107603b4ad0 ("drm/msm/dpu: map mixer/ctl hw blocks in encoder modeset")
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_crtc.c | 3 --
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c | 59
+++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
index 949ebda2fa82..bd3698bf0cf7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c
@@ -624,6 +624,40 @@ static struct msm_display_topology
dpu_encoder_get_topology(
return topology;
}
+static void dpu_encoder_assign_crtc_resources(struct dpu_kms *dpu_kms,
+ struct drm_encoder *drm_enc,
+ struct dpu_global_state
*global_state,
+ struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state)
+{
+ struct dpu_crtc_state *cstate;
+ struct dpu_hw_blk *hw_ctl[MAX_CHANNELS_PER_ENC];
+ struct dpu_hw_blk *hw_lm[MAX_CHANNELS_PER_ENC];
+ struct dpu_hw_blk *hw_dspp[MAX_CHANNELS_PER_ENC];
+ int num_lm, num_ctl, num_dspp, i;
+
+ cstate = to_dpu_crtc_state(crtc_state);
+
+ memset(cstate->mixers, 0, sizeof(cstate->mixers));
+
+ num_ctl = dpu_rm_get_assigned_resources(&dpu_kms->rm, global_state,
+ drm_enc->base.id, DPU_HW_BLK_CTL, hw_ctl, ARRAY_SIZE(hw_ctl));
+ num_lm = dpu_rm_get_assigned_resources(&dpu_kms->rm, global_state,
+ drm_enc->base.id, DPU_HW_BLK_LM, hw_lm, ARRAY_SIZE(hw_lm));
+ num_dspp = dpu_rm_get_assigned_resources(&dpu_kms->rm, global_state,
+ drm_enc->base.id, DPU_HW_BLK_DSPP, hw_dspp,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(hw_dspp));
+
+ for (i = 0; i < num_lm; i++) {
+ int ctl_idx = (i < num_ctl) ? i : (num_ctl-1);
+
+ cstate->mixers[i].hw_lm = to_dpu_hw_mixer(hw_lm[i]);
+ cstate->mixers[i].lm_ctl = to_dpu_hw_ctl(hw_ctl[ctl_idx]);
+ cstate->mixers[i].hw_dspp = i < num_dspp ?
to_dpu_hw_dspp(hw_dspp[i]) : NULL;
+ }
+
+ cstate->num_mixers = num_lm;
+}
+
static int dpu_encoder_virt_atomic_check(
struct drm_encoder *drm_enc,
struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state,
@@ -692,6 +726,9 @@ static int dpu_encoder_virt_atomic_check(
if (!crtc_state->active_changed || crtc_state->enable)
ret = dpu_rm_reserve(&dpu_kms->rm, global_state,
drm_enc, crtc_state, topology);
+ if (!ret)
+ dpu_encoder_assign_crtc_resources(dpu_kms, drm_enc,
+ global_state,
crtc_state);
}
This is now under the drm_atomic_crtc_needs_modeset() condition which is
good, but shouldnt this also move under the same if condition as
dpu_rm_reserve()? There cannot be any assignment without reservation right?
Maybe it's not that obvious from the function name, but it will also
clear previously assigned resources. So, I think it is correct to be
called even if the resources were released without further assignment.
Ack, yes I missed the dpu_rm_release() line just before it, hence
Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
<snip>
