diff mbox series

[v6,4/7] drm/i915: Do not call drm_crtc_arm_vblank_event in async flips

Message ID 20200807093551.10673-5-karthik.b.s@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series Asynchronous flip implementation for i915 | expand

Commit Message

Karthik B S Aug. 7, 2020, 9:35 a.m. UTC
Since the flip done event will be sent in the flip_done_handler,
no need to add the event to the list and delay it for later.

v2: -Moved the async check above vblank_get as it
     was causing issues for PSR.

v3: -No need to wait for vblank to pass, as this wait was causing a
     16ms delay once every few flips.

v4: -Rebased.

v5: -Rebased.

v6: -Rebased.

Signed-off-by: Karthik B S <karthik.b.s@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Vandita Kulkarni <vandita.kulkarni@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c | 8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Ville Syrjälä Sept. 1, 2020, 11:23 a.m. UTC | #1
On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:05:48PM +0530, Karthik B S wrote:
> Since the flip done event will be sent in the flip_done_handler,
> no need to add the event to the list and delay it for later.
> 
> v2: -Moved the async check above vblank_get as it
>      was causing issues for PSR.
> 
> v3: -No need to wait for vblank to pass, as this wait was causing a
>      16ms delay once every few flips.
> 
> v4: -Rebased.
> 
> v5: -Rebased.
> 
> v6: -Rebased.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Karthik B S <karthik.b.s@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vandita Kulkarni <vandita.kulkarni@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c | 8 +++++++-
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
> index c26ca029fc0a..2b2d96c59d7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
> @@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>  	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
>  	u32 psr_status;
>  
> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
> +		goto irq_disable;

We shouldn't really need the irq disable at all if we don't do the
vblank evade. And if we only write ctl+surf then atomicity is already
guaranteed by the hw.

> +
>  	vblank_start = adjusted_mode->crtc_vblank_start;
>  	if (adjusted_mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE)
>  		vblank_start = DIV_ROUND_UP(vblank_start, 2);
> @@ -206,7 +209,7 @@ void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>  	 * Would be slightly nice to just grab the vblank count and arm the
>  	 * event outside of the critical section - the spinlock might spin for a
>  	 * while ... */
> -	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event) {
> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event && !new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip) {
>  		drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm,
>  			    drm_crtc_vblank_get(&crtc->base) != 0);
>  
> @@ -220,6 +223,9 @@ void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>  
>  	local_irq_enable();
>  
> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
> +		return;
> +
>  	if (intel_vgpu_active(dev_priv))
>  		return;
>  
> -- 
> 2.22.0
Karthik B S Sept. 2, 2020, 1:47 p.m. UTC | #2
On 9/1/2020 4:53 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:05:48PM +0530, Karthik B S wrote:
>> Since the flip done event will be sent in the flip_done_handler,
>> no need to add the event to the list and delay it for later.
>>
>> v2: -Moved the async check above vblank_get as it
>>       was causing issues for PSR.
>>
>> v3: -No need to wait for vblank to pass, as this wait was causing a
>>       16ms delay once every few flips.
>>
>> v4: -Rebased.
>>
>> v5: -Rebased.
>>
>> v6: -Rebased.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Karthik B S <karthik.b.s@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vandita Kulkarni <vandita.kulkarni@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c | 8 +++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
>> index c26ca029fc0a..2b2d96c59d7f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
>> @@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>>   	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
>>   	u32 psr_status;
>>   
>> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
>> +		goto irq_disable;
> 
> We shouldn't really need the irq disable at all if we don't do the
> vblank evade. And if we only write ctl+surf then atomicity is already
> guaranteed by the hw.
> 

Thanks for the review.
Sure, will return directly after this check.

Thanks,
Karthik.B.S
>> +
>>   	vblank_start = adjusted_mode->crtc_vblank_start;
>>   	if (adjusted_mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE)
>>   		vblank_start = DIV_ROUND_UP(vblank_start, 2);
>> @@ -206,7 +209,7 @@ void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>>   	 * Would be slightly nice to just grab the vblank count and arm the
>>   	 * event outside of the critical section - the spinlock might spin for a
>>   	 * while ... */
>> -	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event) {
>> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event && !new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip) {
>>   		drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm,
>>   			    drm_crtc_vblank_get(&crtc->base) != 0);
>>   
>> @@ -220,6 +223,9 @@ void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>>   
>>   	local_irq_enable();
>>   
>> +	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>   	if (intel_vgpu_active(dev_priv))
>>   		return;
>>   
>> -- 
>> 2.22.0
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
index c26ca029fc0a..2b2d96c59d7f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c
@@ -93,6 +93,9 @@  void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
 	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
 	u32 psr_status;
 
+	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
+		goto irq_disable;
+
 	vblank_start = adjusted_mode->crtc_vblank_start;
 	if (adjusted_mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE)
 		vblank_start = DIV_ROUND_UP(vblank_start, 2);
@@ -206,7 +209,7 @@  void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
 	 * Would be slightly nice to just grab the vblank count and arm the
 	 * event outside of the critical section - the spinlock might spin for a
 	 * while ... */
-	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event) {
+	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.event && !new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip) {
 		drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm,
 			    drm_crtc_vblank_get(&crtc->base) != 0);
 
@@ -220,6 +223,9 @@  void intel_pipe_update_end(struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
 
 	local_irq_enable();
 
+	if (new_crtc_state->uapi.async_flip)
+		return;
+
 	if (intel_vgpu_active(dev_priv))
 		return;