| Message ID | 20230115124143.464809-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] drm/msm/dpu: fix clocks settings for msm8998 SSPP blocks | expand |
On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 > clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR > planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. > > Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") > Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> > Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { > SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, > sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), > SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... > - sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > + sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA2), > SSPP_BLK("sspp_11", SSPP_DMA3, 0x2a000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > - sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > + sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA3), Yes, msm8998_mdp defines both DMA2/3 and CURSOR0/1 clocks. R-b after using DMA_MSM8998_MASK without the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR bit. However, my downstream sources still define cursor SSPPs that are missing here (after all, there's clk-ctrl for these already), at xin ID 2 and 10 with addresses 0x3500 and 0x37000 downstream (-0x1000 here): SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR0, 0x34000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, cursor sblk?, 2, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR1, 0x36000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, cursor sblk?, 10, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), Or should you/I send that as a separate folloup patch? - Marijn > }; > > static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg sdm845_sspp[] = {
On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 >> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR >> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. >> >> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") >> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> >> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, >> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. > >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA2), >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_11", SSPP_DMA3, 0x2a000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA3), > > Yes, msm8998_mdp defines both DMA2/3 and CURSOR0/1 clocks. R-b after > using DMA_MSM8998_MASK without the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR bit. > > However, my downstream sources still define cursor SSPPs that are > missing here (after all, there's clk-ctrl for these already), at xin ID > 2 and 10 with addresses 0x3500 and 0x37000 downstream (-0x1000 here): > > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR0, 0x34000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, > cursor sblk?, 2, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR1, 0x36000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, I think this should not be the DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, but don't bet on my words, I haven't check actual cursor plane capabilities. > cursor sblk?, 10, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > > Or should you/I send that as a separate folloup patch? Ideally one can add these two planes and then switch two mentioned DMA planes to plain DMA_MSM8998_MASK. > > - Marijn > >> }; >> >> static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg sdm845_sspp[] = {
On 2023-01-24 12:19:27, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > > On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 > >> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR > >> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. > >> > >> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") > >> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> > >> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> > >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> > >> --- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, > >> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > > > Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... > > Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using > these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into > sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. Doesn't that require special hardware support, or can any DMA pipe support "hw cursor mode/planes", whatever that means? Sorry for not being well versed in this area, I'd expect DMA pipes and CURSOR pipes to have a different set of features / capabilities. Commit 07ca1fc0f8a0 ("drm/msm/dpu: enable cursor plane on dpu") leads me to believe that it's mostly to let userspace use these DMA pipes for cursors (having cursor planes available in uapi) rather than requiring any special hardware support (though semantics do seem to change in a nontrivial way). > >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA2), > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_11", SSPP_DMA3, 0x2a000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA3), > > > > Yes, msm8998_mdp defines both DMA2/3 and CURSOR0/1 clocks. R-b after > > using DMA_MSM8998_MASK without the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR bit. > > > > However, my downstream sources still define cursor SSPPs that are > > missing here (after all, there's clk-ctrl for these already), at xin ID > > 2 and 10 with addresses 0x3500 and 0x37000 downstream (-0x1000 here): > > > > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR0, 0x34000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, > > cursor sblk?, 2, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR1, 0x36000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, > > I think this should not be the DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, but don't bet on > my words, I haven't check actual cursor plane capabilities. As we've seen in [1] (specifically [2]) there are a few more driver/hw changes required to properly implement/support DPU_SSPP_CURSOR? [1]: https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commits/next_20220624-msm8998-hdmi [2]; https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commit/7d8d739cfbfa551120868986d5824f7b2b116ac1 - Marijn > > cursor sblk?, 10, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > > > > Or should you/I send that as a separate folloup patch? > > Ideally one can add these two planes and then switch two mentioned DMA > planes to plain DMA_MSM8998_MASK. > > > > > - Marijn > > > >> }; > >> > >> static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg sdm845_sspp[] = { > > -- > With best wishes > Dmitry >
On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 13:12, Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote: > > On 2023-01-24 12:19:27, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > > > On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > >> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 > > >> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR > > >> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. > > >> > > >> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") > > >> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> > > >> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> > > >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> > > >> --- > > >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- > > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > >> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > >> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { > > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, > > >> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), > > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > > > > > Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... > > > > Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using > > these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into > > sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. > > Doesn't that require special hardware support, or can any DMA pipe > support "hw cursor mode/planes", whatever that means? Sorry for not > being well versed in this area, I'd expect DMA pipes and CURSOR pipes to > have a different set of features / capabilities. Yes, they have different capabilities. but DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK = DMA_MSM8998_MASK | BIT(DPU_SSPP_CURSOR). And the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR is used internally to tell the DRM core that the corresponding plane is going to be used as a "userspace cursor" plane. > Commit 07ca1fc0f8a0 ("drm/msm/dpu: enable cursor plane on dpu") leads me > to believe that it's mostly to let userspace use these DMA pipes for > cursors (having cursor planes available in uapi) rather than requiring > any special hardware support (though semantics do seem to change in a > nontrivial way). Correct. DRM/userspace cursor planes = planes which userspace can use to draw mouse cursor. Legacy compositors and legacy cursor IOCTLs stick to using them DPU/MDP5 CURSOR plane (sspp_12/13) = lightweight limited plane without additional features, targeting HW cursor only, not present since sdm845 DPU_SSPP_CURSOR = bit which tells DPU core to mark a plane as 'DRM/userspace cursor plane'. > > > >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > > >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA2), > > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_11", SSPP_DMA3, 0x2a000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > >> - sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > > >> + sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA3), > > > > > > Yes, msm8998_mdp defines both DMA2/3 and CURSOR0/1 clocks. R-b after > > > using DMA_MSM8998_MASK without the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR bit. > > > > > > However, my downstream sources still define cursor SSPPs that are > > > missing here (after all, there's clk-ctrl for these already), at xin ID > > > 2 and 10 with addresses 0x3500 and 0x37000 downstream (-0x1000 here): > > > > > > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR0, 0x34000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, > > > cursor sblk?, 2, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), > > > SSPP_BLK("sspp_?", SSPP_CURSOR1, 0x36000, DMA_CURSOR_SM8998_MASK, > > > > I think this should not be the DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, but don't bet on > > my words, I haven't check actual cursor plane capabilities. > > As we've seen in [1] (specifically [2]) there are a few more driver/hw > changes required to properly implement/support DPU_SSPP_CURSOR? > > [1]: https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commits/next_20220624-msm8998-hdmi > [2]; https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commit/7d8d739cfbfa551120868986d5824f7b2b116ac1 > > - Marijn > > > > cursor sblk?, 10, SSPP_TYPE_CURSOR, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), > > > > > > Or should you/I send that as a separate folloup patch? > > > > Ideally one can add these two planes and then switch two mentioned DMA > > planes to plain DMA_MSM8998_MASK. > > > > > > > > - Marijn > > > > > >> }; > > >> > > >> static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg sdm845_sspp[] = { > > > > -- > > With best wishes > > Dmitry > >
On 2023-01-24 13:20:57, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 13:12, Marijn Suijten > <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote: > > > > On 2023-01-24 12:19:27, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > > > > On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > >> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 > > > >> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR > > > >> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. > > > >> > > > >> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") > > > >> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> > > > >> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> > > > >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> > > > >> --- > > > >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- > > > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > >> > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > > >> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 > > > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > > > >> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { > > > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, > > > >> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), > > > >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > > > > > > > Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... > > > > > > Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using > > > these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into > > > sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. > > > > Doesn't that require special hardware support, or can any DMA pipe > > support "hw cursor mode/planes", whatever that means? Sorry for not > > being well versed in this area, I'd expect DMA pipes and CURSOR pipes to > > have a different set of features / capabilities. > > Yes, they have different capabilities. but DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK = > DMA_MSM8998_MASK | BIT(DPU_SSPP_CURSOR). And the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR is > used internally to tell the DRM core that the corresponding plane is > going to be used as a "userspace cursor" plane. Different capabilities for userspace, but not in terms hardware (/driver support, yet)? If so, then: Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> > > Commit 07ca1fc0f8a0 ("drm/msm/dpu: enable cursor plane on dpu") leads me > > to believe that it's mostly to let userspace use these DMA pipes for > > cursors (having cursor planes available in uapi) rather than requiring > > any special hardware support (though semantics do seem to change in a > > nontrivial way). > > Correct. > DRM/userspace cursor planes = planes which userspace can use to draw > mouse cursor. Legacy compositors and legacy cursor IOCTLs stick to > using them > DPU/MDP5 CURSOR plane (sspp_12/13) = lightweight limited plane without But these DMA pipes are _not_ lightweight/limited? > additional features, targeting HW cursor only, not present since > sdm845 > DPU_SSPP_CURSOR = bit which tells DPU core to mark a plane as > 'DRM/userspace cursor plane'. Ack, so it's not toggling anything hardware specific /yet/. However, does this prevent userspace from using these pipes/planes for other DMA purposes as they're marked as a different _type_ of plane? And will that change when we do end up "implementing more rigorous/strict hardware support"? For the other SoCs, are their DMA pipes also featureful and would the presence of DPU_SSPP_CURSOR severely limit its functionality? And is this thing that "virtual planes" would be going to "solve"? <snip> > > As we've seen in [1] (specifically [2]) there are a few more driver/hw > > changes required to properly implement/support DPU_SSPP_CURSOR? > > > > [1]: https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commits/next_20220624-msm8998-hdmi > > [2]; https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commit/7d8d739cfbfa551120868986d5824f7b2b116ac1 Referring to changes like these ^. - Marijn
On 24/01/2023 14:06, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2023-01-24 13:20:57, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 13:12, Marijn Suijten >> <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 2023-01-24 12:19:27, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>> On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: >>>>> On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>>>> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 >>>>>> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR >>>>>> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") >>>>>> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> >>>>>> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >>>>>> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >>>>>> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { >>>>>> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, >>>>>> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), >>>>>> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, >>>>> >>>>> Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... >>>> >>>> Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using >>>> these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into >>>> sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. >>> >>> Doesn't that require special hardware support, or can any DMA pipe >>> support "hw cursor mode/planes", whatever that means? Sorry for not >>> being well versed in this area, I'd expect DMA pipes and CURSOR pipes to >>> have a different set of features / capabilities. >> >> Yes, they have different capabilities. but DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK = >> DMA_MSM8998_MASK | BIT(DPU_SSPP_CURSOR). And the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR is >> used internally to tell the DRM core that the corresponding plane is >> going to be used as a "userspace cursor" plane. > > Different capabilities for userspace, but not in terms hardware (/driver > support, yet)? If so, then: > > Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> > >>> Commit 07ca1fc0f8a0 ("drm/msm/dpu: enable cursor plane on dpu") leads me >>> to believe that it's mostly to let userspace use these DMA pipes for >>> cursors (having cursor planes available in uapi) rather than requiring >>> any special hardware support (though semantics do seem to change in a >>> nontrivial way). >> >> Correct. >> DRM/userspace cursor planes = planes which userspace can use to draw >> mouse cursor. Legacy compositors and legacy cursor IOCTLs stick to >> using them >> DPU/MDP5 CURSOR plane (sspp_12/13) = lightweight limited plane without > > But these DMA pipes are _not_ lightweight/limited? No, they are not. > >> additional features, targeting HW cursor only, not present since >> sdm845 >> DPU_SSPP_CURSOR = bit which tells DPU core to mark a plane as >> 'DRM/userspace cursor plane'. > > Ack, so it's not toggling anything hardware specific /yet/. However, > does this prevent userspace from using these pipes/planes for other DMA > purposes as they're marked as a different _type_ of plane? This is what 'universal planes' API is solving. Historically there were three kinds of planes: primary (iow background), cursor and overlay. By default an application sees only the overlay planes and has some additional API to manipulate cursors and backgrounds. Then at some point it was found that this split is not worth all the troubles, since applications can better utilize the hardware if they can decide on their own what should be done. So now we still have all three kinds of planes (for the legacy userspace), but behind the scenes they all are the same. If an application knows how to knock the door, it will see all the planes with the capabilities being exposed through plane properties, etc. Back to our case. We mark these planes as 'cursor' ones, to let the legacy composers to use them for hardware cursor. I think it was decided that not having the cursor is worse than requiring another blending step. On the other hand newer composers see a full array of planes. > And will > that change when we do end up "implementing more rigorous/strict > hardware support"? Once implemented, there will be more planes for msm8998 (and eventually sdm660/630, once we have them too). Some of them will be limited in size or in the Z order (cursor), some will not (rgb, dma, vig). > For the other SoCs, are their DMA pipes also > featureful and would the presence of DPU_SSPP_CURSOR severely limit its > functionality? All DMA pipes have the same set of features (in the same generation of course). No, it's just a software marker. > And is this thing that "virtual planes" would be going > to "solve"? Included. The virtual planes is trying to solve a slightly different part of the story: to remove 1:1 correspondence between planes and pipes. Sometimes it would be nice to use two HW pipes for a single DRM plane (e.g. the kernel expects to have a single primary plane whose resolution matches the resolution of the CRTC, 4k = two SSPP because of hardware limitations). Sometimes a single HW pipe can be used to drive two DRM planes (see multirect). So, pretty much in the same way as we use one or two LMs to drive a CRTC, it is useful to use 1/2, 1 or 2 SSPPs to drive a single DRM plane. > > <snip> > >>> As we've seen in [1] (specifically [2]) there are a few more driver/hw >>> changes required to properly implement/support DPU_SSPP_CURSOR? >>> >>> [1]: https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commits/next_20220624-msm8998-hdmi >>> [2]; https://github.com/rawoul/linux/commit/7d8d739cfbfa551120868986d5824f7b2b116ac1 > > Referring to changes like these ^. > > - Marijn
On 2023-01-24 14:29:38, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 24/01/2023 14:06, Marijn Suijten wrote: > > On 2023-01-24 13:20:57, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 13:12, Marijn Suijten > >> <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 2023-01-24 12:19:27, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>> On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > >>>>> On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>>>> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 > >>>>>> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR > >>>>>> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") > >>>>>> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> > >>>>>> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >>>>>> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c > >>>>>> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { > >>>>>> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, > >>>>>> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), > >>>>>> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > >>>>> > >>>>> Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... > >>>> > >>>> Ack for the doublespace. By removing _CURSOR we would disallow using > >>>> these planes as hw cursor planes. This would switch all compositors into > >>>> sw cursor mode, thus damaging the performance. > >>> > >>> Doesn't that require special hardware support, or can any DMA pipe > >>> support "hw cursor mode/planes", whatever that means? Sorry for not > >>> being well versed in this area, I'd expect DMA pipes and CURSOR pipes to > >>> have a different set of features / capabilities. > >> > >> Yes, they have different capabilities. but DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK = > >> DMA_MSM8998_MASK | BIT(DPU_SSPP_CURSOR). And the DPU_SSPP_CURSOR is > >> used internally to tell the DRM core that the corresponding plane is > >> going to be used as a "userspace cursor" plane. > > > > Different capabilities for userspace, but not in terms hardware (/driver > > support, yet)? If so, then: > > > > Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> > > > >>> Commit 07ca1fc0f8a0 ("drm/msm/dpu: enable cursor plane on dpu") leads me > >>> to believe that it's mostly to let userspace use these DMA pipes for > >>> cursors (having cursor planes available in uapi) rather than requiring > >>> any special hardware support (though semantics do seem to change in a > >>> nontrivial way). > >> > >> Correct. > >> DRM/userspace cursor planes = planes which userspace can use to draw > >> mouse cursor. Legacy compositors and legacy cursor IOCTLs stick to > >> using them > >> DPU/MDP5 CURSOR plane (sspp_12/13) = lightweight limited plane without > > > > But these DMA pipes are _not_ lightweight/limited? > > No, they are not. > > > > >> additional features, targeting HW cursor only, not present since > >> sdm845 > >> DPU_SSPP_CURSOR = bit which tells DPU core to mark a plane as > >> 'DRM/userspace cursor plane'. > > > > Ack, so it's not toggling anything hardware specific /yet/. However, > > does this prevent userspace from using these pipes/planes for other DMA > > purposes as they're marked as a different _type_ of plane? > > This is what 'universal planes' API is solving. > > Historically there were three kinds of planes: primary (iow background), > cursor and overlay. > By default an application sees only the overlay planes and has some > additional API to manipulate cursors and backgrounds. > > Then at some point it was found that this split is not worth all the > troubles, since applications can better utilize the hardware if they can > decide on their own what should be done. So now we still have all three > kinds of planes (for the legacy userspace), but behind the scenes they > all are the same. If an application knows how to knock the door, it will > see all the planes with the capabilities being exposed through plane > properties, etc. > > Back to our case. We mark these planes as 'cursor' ones, to let the > legacy composers to use them for hardware cursor. I think it was decided > that not having the cursor is worse than requiring another blending > step. On the other hand newer composers see a full array of planes. Thanks so much for this backstory, that explains why it shouldn't harm modern compositors; in modetest I see these planes have the cursor type property, but no restriction on zpos for example. > > And will > > that change when we do end up "implementing more rigorous/strict > > hardware support"? > > Once implemented, there will be more planes for msm8998 (and eventually > sdm660/630, once we have them too). Some of them will be limited in size > or in the Z order (cursor), some will not (rgb, dma, vig). That's what I saw one of the linked patches; at that point we should add separate feature bits for this so as to not limit the size or Z-order range for these DMA-pipes-disguised-as-cursor-planes. > > For the other SoCs, are their DMA pipes also > > featureful and would the presence of DPU_SSPP_CURSOR severely limit its > > functionality? > > All DMA pipes have the same set of features (in the same generation of > course). > No, it's just a software marker. Ack yes, so again once the software marker starts limiting properties for actual CURSOR support (on pre-msm8998) we should distinguish them from DMA pipes that are simply marked as cursor planes... > > And is this thing that "virtual planes" would be going > > to "solve"? > > Included. The virtual planes is trying to solve a slightly different > part of the story: to remove 1:1 correspondence between planes and > pipes. Sometimes it would be nice to use two HW pipes for a single DRM > plane (e.g. the kernel expects to have a single primary plane whose > resolution matches the resolution of the CRTC, 4k = two SSPP because of > hardware limitations). Sometimes a single HW pipe can be used to drive > two DRM planes (see multirect). So, pretty much in the same way as we > use one or two LMs to drive a CRTC, it is useful to use 1/2, 1 or 2 > SSPPs to drive a single DRM plane. Ah, ack, that makes sense, and it wouldn't / shouldn't be up to userspace to assign and use the pipes on its own. - Marijn
On 24/01/2023 11:59, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2023-01-15 14:41:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 >> clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR >> planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. >> >> Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") >> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> >> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c >> @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, >> sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), >> SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, > > Drop the _CURSOR mask here? And the double space.... As a second thought, I think I will keep the spacing in this patchset. I will clean up spacing during the hw catalog split.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c index 0f3da480b066..ad0c55464154 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c @@ -1180,9 +1180,9 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg msm8998_sspp[] = { SSPP_BLK("sspp_9", SSPP_DMA1, 0x26000, DMA_MSM8998_MASK, sdm845_dma_sblk_1, 5, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1), SSPP_BLK("sspp_10", SSPP_DMA2, 0x28000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, - sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0), + sdm845_dma_sblk_2, 9, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA2), SSPP_BLK("sspp_11", SSPP_DMA3, 0x2a000, DMA_CURSOR_MSM8998_MASK, - sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1), + sdm845_dma_sblk_3, 13, SSPP_TYPE_DMA, DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA3), }; static const struct dpu_sspp_cfg sdm845_sspp[] = {
DMA2 and DMA3 planes on msm8998 should use corresponding DMA2 and DMA3 clocks rather than CURSOR0/1 clocks (which are used for the CURSOR planes). Correct corresponding SSPP declarations. Fixes: 94391a14fc27 ("drm/msm/dpu1: Add MSM8998 to hw catalog") Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org> Cc: Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@somainline.org> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)