On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 10:01:26AM -0600, Govindapillai, Vinod wrote:
On Fri, 2025-11-07 at 07:45 -0600, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 01:08:15PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Nov 2025, "Govindapillai, Vinod"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2025-11-07 at 12:16 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Fri, 07 Nov 2025, Vinod Govindapillai
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Disable FBC as part for the wa for the bmg variant
> > > >
> > > > Bspec: 74212
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Govindapillai
> > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.c | 4 ++++
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.h | 1 +
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c | 10
> > > > ++++++++++
> > > > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.c
> > > > index c528aaa679ca..ba2272d85a04 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_wa.c
> > > > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> > > > #include "intel_display_core.h"
> > > > #include "intel_display_regs.h"
> > > > #include "intel_display_wa.h"
> > > > +#include "intel_step.h"
> > > >
> > > > static void gen11_display_wa_apply(struct intel_display
> > > > *display)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -69,6 +70,9 @@ bool __intel_display_wa(struct
> > > > intel_display
> > > > *display, enum intel_display_wa wa,
> > > > return DISPLAY_VER(display) == 13;
> > > > case INTEL_DISPLAY_WA_22014263786:
> > > > return IS_DISPLAY_VERx100(display, 1100,
> > > > 1400);
> > > > + case INTEL_DISPLAY_WA_15018326506:
> > > > + return DISPLAY_VERx100(display) == 1401 &&
> > > > + INTEL_DISPLAY_STEP(display) ==
> > > > STEP_C0;
> > >
> > > IS_DISPLAY_VERx100_STEP().
> >
> > I was looking into the comments for that macro! This wa apply
> > only for
> > step c0 (as of now)! I wasn't sure what the "until" part could be
> > in
> > that macro! So what do you suggest for the "until" STEP_D0 or
> > STEP_FOREVER in such cases!
>
> If it's C0 only, then C1 is the next step, not D0.
it would be very weird to be C0 **only**, so I went to check the WA
db
and I don't really see any stepping restriction
Lucas De Marchi
wa_16023588340 disabled FBC in g31. But this wa 15018326506 recommends
disabling FBC for g31 which has display stepping C0 from bspec 68090.
right, I see there the DE_ID 0x03804008. For some reason the WA itself
is not updating the stepping correctly, but if it applied to other
steppings it would actually be for g21. Matt / Uma, do you know why the
stepping is not correct?
thanks
Lucas De Marchi
