Re: [PATCH v2] drm/msm/dpu: always program dsc active bits

[Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>]

On 4/14/2023 11:55 AM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/14/2023 10:28 AM, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>> On 2023-04-14 08:41:37, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/14/2023 12:48 AM, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>>>> Capitalize DSC in the title, as discussed in v1.
>>>>
>>>> On 2023-04-13 08:56:41, Kuogee Hsieh wrote:
>>>>> In current code, the DSC active bits are written only if cfg->dsc 
>>>>> is set.
>>>>> However, for displays which are hot-pluggable, there can be a use-case
>>>>> of disconnecting a DSC supported sink and connecting a non-DSC sink.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those cases we need to clear DSC active bits during tear down.
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes in V2:
>>>>> 1) correct commit text as suggested
>>>>> 2) correct Fixes commit id
>>>>> 3) add FIXME comment
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 77f6da90487c ("drm/msm/disp/dpu1: Add DSC support in hw_ctl")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@quicinc.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>
>>>>
>>>> By default git send-email should pick this up in the CC line...  but I
>>>> had to download this patch from lore once again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I think what happened here is, he didnt git am the prev rev and
>>> make changes on top of that so git send-email didnt pick up. We should
>>> fix that process.
>>
>> The mail was sent so it must have gone through git send-email, unless a
>> different mail client was used to send the .patch file.  I think you are
>> confusing this with git am (which doesn't need to be used if editing a
>> commit on a local branch) and subsequently git format-patch, which takes
>> a commit from a git repository and turns it into a .patch file: neither
>> of these "converts" r-b's (and other tags) to cc, that's happening in
>> git send-email (see `--suppress-cc` documentation in `man
>> git-send-email`).
>>
> 
> Yes, ofcourse git send-email was used to send the patch, not any other 
> mail client.
> 
> Yes i am also aware that send-email converts rb to CC.
> 
> But if you keep working on the local branch, then you would have to 
> manually add the r-bs. If you use am of the prev version and develop on 
> that, it will automatically add the r-bs.
> 

just a minor point, in case you didnt notice, my r-b was dropped too :)
due to manual propagation.

> 
>> I can recommend b4: it has lots of useful features including
>> automatically picking up reviews and processing revisions.  It even
>> requires a changelog to be edited ;).  However, finding the right flags
>> and trusting it'll "do as ordered" is a bit daunting at first.
>>

Ack.

>>>>> ---
>>>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.c | 8 ++++----
>>>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.c 
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.c
>>>>> index bbdc95c..1651cd7 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.c
>>>>> @@ -541,10 +541,10 @@ static void dpu_hw_ctl_intf_cfg_v1(struct 
>>>>> dpu_hw_ctl *ctx,
>>>>>        if (cfg->merge_3d)
>>>>>            DPU_REG_WRITE(c, CTL_MERGE_3D_ACTIVE,
>>>>>                      BIT(cfg->merge_3d - MERGE_3D_0));
>>>>> -    if (cfg->dsc) {
>>>>> -        DPU_REG_WRITE(&ctx->hw, CTL_FLUSH, DSC_IDX);
>>>>> -        DPU_REG_WRITE(c, CTL_DSC_ACTIVE, cfg->dsc);
>>>>> -    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    /* FIXME: fix reset_intf_cfg to handle teardown of dsc */
>>>>
>>>> There's more wrong than just moving (not "fix"ing) this bit of code 
>>>> into
>>>> reset_intf_cfg.  And this will have to be re-wrapped in `if (cfg->dsc)`
>>>> again by reverting this patch.  Perhaps that can be explained, or link
>>>> to Abhinav's explanation to make it clear to readers what this FIXME
>>>> actually means?  Let's wait for Abhinav and Dmitry to confirm the
>>>> desired communication here.
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/ec045d6b-4ffd-0f8c-4011-8db45edc6978@quicinc.com/ 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I am fine with linking this explanation in the commit text and
>>> mentioning that till thats fixed, we need to go with this solution. The
>>> FIXME itself is fine, I will work on it and I remember this context 
>>> well.
>>
>> Looks like it was removed entirely in v3, in favour of only describing
>> it in the patch body.  The wording seems a bit off but that's fine by me
>> if you're picking this up soon anyway.
>>
>> - Marijn