mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com>
To: Jun Nie <jun.nie@linaro.org>, Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
	"Abhinav Kumar" <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>,
	Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
	"Marijn Suijten" <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@ffwll.ch>,
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/14] drm/msm/dpu: check every pipe per capability
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 11:38:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d86495d1-4d18-4809-a0a2-53ff26406e9f@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250506-quad-pipe-upstream-v9-2-f7b273a8cc80@linaro.org>



On 5/6/2025 8:47 AM, Jun Nie wrote:
> The capability stored in sblk and pipe_hw_caps is checked only for
> SSPP of the first pipe in the pair with current implementation. That
> of the 2nd pipe, r_pipe, is not checked and may violate hardware
> capability. Move requirement check to dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe()
> for the check of every pipe.
> 
> Fixes: ("dbbf57dfd04e6 drm/msm/dpu: split dpu_plane_atomic_check()")
> Signed-off-by: Jun Nie <jun.nie@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>

Hi Jun,

Just wanted to note that this has already been merged in msm-next [1] so 
I think you can drop this in the next revision.

But, FWIW

Reviewed-by: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com>

Thanks,

Jessica Zhang

[1] 
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/commit/bcaa391e177c06a58c5f3cd18484a317d40239aa

> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_plane.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>   1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_plane.c
> index af3e541f60c303eb5212524e877129359b5ca98c..aeb90c287245d6aaa18b9f280d1e628ee6ed74f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_plane.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_plane.c
> @@ -729,12 +729,40 @@ static int dpu_plane_check_inline_rotation(struct dpu_plane *pdpu,
>   static int dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe(struct dpu_plane *pdpu,
>   		struct dpu_sw_pipe *pipe,
>   		struct dpu_sw_pipe_cfg *pipe_cfg,
> -		const struct msm_format *fmt,
> -		const struct drm_display_mode *mode)
> +		const struct drm_display_mode *mode,
> +		struct drm_plane_state *new_plane_state)
>   {
>   	uint32_t min_src_size;
>   	struct dpu_kms *kms = _dpu_plane_get_kms(&pdpu->base);
>   	int ret;
> +	const struct msm_format *fmt;
> +	uint32_t supported_rotations;
> +	const struct dpu_sspp_cfg *pipe_hw_caps;
> +	const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks *sblk;
> +
> +	pipe_hw_caps = pipe->sspp->cap;
> +	sblk = pipe->sspp->cap->sblk;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We already have verified scaling against platform limitations.
> +	 * Now check if the SSPP supports scaling at all.
> +	 */
> +	if (!sblk->scaler_blk.len &&
> +	    ((drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->src) >> 16 !=
> +	      drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->dst)) ||
> +	     (drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->src) >> 16 !=
> +	      drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->dst))))
> +		return -ERANGE;
> +
> +	fmt = msm_framebuffer_format(new_plane_state->fb);
> +
> +	supported_rotations = DRM_MODE_REFLECT_MASK | DRM_MODE_ROTATE_0;
> +
> +	if (pipe_hw_caps->features & BIT(DPU_SSPP_INLINE_ROTATION))
> +		supported_rotations |= DRM_MODE_ROTATE_90;
> +
> +	pipe_cfg->rotation = drm_rotation_simplify(new_plane_state->rotation,
> +						   supported_rotations);
>   
>   	min_src_size = MSM_FORMAT_IS_YUV(fmt) ? 2 : 1;
>   
> @@ -923,47 +951,20 @@ static int dpu_plane_atomic_check_sspp(struct drm_plane *plane,
>   	struct dpu_plane_state *pstate = to_dpu_plane_state(new_plane_state);
>   	struct dpu_sw_pipe *pipe = &pstate->pipe;
>   	struct dpu_sw_pipe *r_pipe = &pstate->r_pipe;
> -	const struct msm_format *fmt;
>   	struct dpu_sw_pipe_cfg *pipe_cfg = &pstate->pipe_cfg;
>   	struct dpu_sw_pipe_cfg *r_pipe_cfg = &pstate->r_pipe_cfg;
> -	uint32_t supported_rotations;
> -	const struct dpu_sspp_cfg *pipe_hw_caps;
> -	const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks *sblk;
>   	int ret = 0;
>   
> -	pipe_hw_caps = pipe->sspp->cap;
> -	sblk = pipe->sspp->cap->sblk;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * We already have verified scaling against platform limitations.
> -	 * Now check if the SSPP supports scaling at all.
> -	 */
> -	if (!sblk->scaler_blk.len &&
> -	    ((drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->src) >> 16 !=
> -	      drm_rect_width(&new_plane_state->dst)) ||
> -	     (drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->src) >> 16 !=
> -	      drm_rect_height(&new_plane_state->dst))))
> -		return -ERANGE;
> -
> -	fmt = msm_framebuffer_format(new_plane_state->fb);
> -
> -	supported_rotations = DRM_MODE_REFLECT_MASK | DRM_MODE_ROTATE_0;
> -
> -	if (pipe_hw_caps->features & BIT(DPU_SSPP_INLINE_ROTATION))
> -		supported_rotations |= DRM_MODE_ROTATE_90;
> -
> -	pipe_cfg->rotation = drm_rotation_simplify(new_plane_state->rotation,
> -						   supported_rotations);
> -	r_pipe_cfg->rotation = pipe_cfg->rotation;
> -
> -	ret = dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe(pdpu, pipe, pipe_cfg, fmt,
> -					  &crtc_state->adjusted_mode);
> +	ret = dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe(pdpu, pipe, pipe_cfg,
> +					  &crtc_state->adjusted_mode,
> +					  new_plane_state);
>   	if (ret)
>   		return ret;
>   
>   	if (drm_rect_width(&r_pipe_cfg->src_rect) != 0) {
> -		ret = dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe(pdpu, r_pipe, r_pipe_cfg, fmt,
> -						  &crtc_state->adjusted_mode);
> +		ret = dpu_plane_atomic_check_pipe(pdpu, r_pipe, r_pipe_cfg,
> +						  &crtc_state->adjusted_mode,
> +						  new_plane_state);
>   		if (ret)
>   			return ret;
>   	}
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-08 18:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-06 15:47 [PATCH v9 00/14] drm/msm/dpu: Support quad pipe with dual-DSI Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 01/14] drm/atomic-helper: Add crtc check before checking plane Jun Nie
2025-05-08 10:47   ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2025-05-09  3:08     ` Jun Nie
2025-05-09 15:18       ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 02/14] drm/msm/dpu: check every pipe per capability Jun Nie
2025-05-08 18:38   ` Jessica Zhang [this message]
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 03/14] drm/msm/dpu: polish log for resource allocation Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 04/14] drm/msm/dpu: decide right side per last bit Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 05/14] drm/msm/dpu: fix mixer number counter on allocation Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 06/14] drm/msm/dpu: bind correct pingpong for quad pipe Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 07/14] drm/msm/dpu: Add pipe as trace argument Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 08/14] drm/msm/dpu: handle pipes as array Jun Nie
2025-05-08 18:00   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 09/14] drm/msm/dpu: split PIPES_PER_STAGE definition per plane and mixer Jun Nie
2025-05-08 20:42   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-08 20:55     ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-23 10:03       ` Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 10/14] drm/msm/dpu: Use dedicated WB number definition Jun Nie
2025-05-08 13:10   ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2025-05-08 18:03   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 11/14] drm/msm/dpu: blend pipes per mixer pairs config Jun Nie
2025-05-08 20:53   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 12/14] drm/msm/dpu: support SSPP assignment for quad-pipe case Jun Nie
2025-05-08 18:51   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 13/14] drm/msm/dpu: support plane splitting in " Jun Nie
2025-05-08 21:24   ` Jessica Zhang
2025-05-23 10:21     ` Jun Nie
2025-05-06 15:47 ` [PATCH v9 14/14] drm/msm/dpu: Enable quad-pipe for DSC and dual-DSI case Jun Nie
2025-05-08 21:30   ` Jessica Zhang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=d86495d1-4d18-4809-a0a2-53ff26406e9f@quicinc.com \
    --to=quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jun.nie@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lumag@kernel.org \
    --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=marijn.suijten@somainline.org \
    --cc=mripard@kernel.org \
    --cc=quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com \
    --cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
    --cc=sean@poorly.run \
    --cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®