Op 28-11-2019 om 16:59 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 04:48:04PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Op 27-11-2019 om 21:12 schreef Ville Syrjala:
>>> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>> The code assumes we can omit the cfb allocation once fbc
>>> has been enabled once. That's nonsense. Let's try to
>>> reallocate it if we need to.
>>>
>>> The code is still a mess, but maybe this is enough to get
>>> fbc going in some cases where it initially underallocates
>>> the cfb and there's no full modeset to fix it up.
>>>
>>> Cc: Daniel Drake <dr...@endlessm.com>
>>> Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zan...@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Jian-Hong Pan <jian-h...@endlessm.com>
>>> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
>>> index c976698b0729..928059a5da80 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
>>> @@ -672,6 +672,14 @@ static void intel_fbc_update_state_cache(struct
>>> intel_crtc *crtc,
>>> cache->fence_id = -1;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static bool intel_fbc_cfb_size_changed(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>> +{
>>> + struct intel_fbc *fbc = &dev_priv->fbc;
>>> +
>>> + return intel_fbc_calculate_cfb_size(dev_priv, &fbc->state_cache) >
>>> + fbc->compressed_fb.size * fbc->threshold;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static bool intel_fbc_can_activate(struct intel_crtc *crtc)
>>> {
>>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
>>> @@ -757,8 +765,7 @@ static bool intel_fbc_can_activate(struct intel_crtc
>>> *crtc)
>>> * we didn't get any invalidate/deactivate calls, but this would require
>>> * a lot of tracking just for a specific case. If we conclude it's an
>>> * important case, we can implement it later. */
>>> - if (intel_fbc_calculate_cfb_size(dev_priv, &fbc->state_cache) >
>>> - fbc->compressed_fb.size * fbc->threshold) {
>>> + if (intel_fbc_cfb_size_changed(dev_priv)) {
>>> fbc->no_fbc_reason = "CFB requirements changed";
>>> return false;
>>> }
>>> @@ -1112,12 +1119,12 @@ void intel_fbc_enable(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
>>> mutex_lock(&fbc->lock);
>>>
>>> if (fbc->crtc) {
>>> - WARN_ON(fbc->crtc == crtc && !crtc_state->enable_fbc);
>>> - goto out;
>>> - }
>>> + if (fbc->crtc != crtc ||
>>> + !intel_fbc_cfb_size_changed(dev_priv))
>>> + goto out;
>>>
>>> - if (!crtc_state->enable_fbc)
>>> - goto out;
>>> + __intel_fbc_disable(dev_priv);
>>> + }
>>>
>>> WARN_ON(fbc->active);
>>>
>>> @@ -1130,6 +1137,7 @@ void intel_fbc_enable(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
>>> if (intel_fbc_alloc_cfb(dev_priv,
>>> intel_fbc_calculate_cfb_size(dev_priv, cache),
>>> fb->format->cpp[0])) {
>>> + cache->plane.visible = false;
>>> fbc->no_fbc_reason = "not enough stolen memory";
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>> Makes sense, unfortunately kms_cursor_legacy starts failing on this series.
>> :(
>>
>> For 1-11, 14
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> We should probably get rid of the FBC disable on frontbuffer disable as
>> well. I had some patches but nothing upstream-worthy yet. :(
> How would we get rid of the disable there? By triggering nukes at some
> predefined interval? Doesn't sound all that great.
Not touching FBC on frontbuffer write at all, and forcing userspace to use the
dirtyfb api. I think the whole implicit tracking should be removed.
>
>> 12 and 13 need more thought for now, kms_cursor_legacy is failing.
> Already posted the v2 that fixes it.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
