Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Dec 2022 02:52:01 +0200 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/msm: DSC Electric Boogaloo for sm8[12]50 | From | Dmitry Baryshkov <> |
| |
On 14/12/2022 21:23, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2022-12-14 20:40:06, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On 14/12/2022 01:22, Marijn Suijten wrote: >>> This preliminary Display Stream Compression support package for >>> (initially tested on) sm8[12]50 is based on comparing DSC behaviour >>> between downstream and mainline. Some new callbacks are added (for >>> binding blocks on active CTLs), logic bugs are corrected, zeroed struct >>> members are now assigned proper values, and RM allocation and hw block >>> retrieval now hand out (or not) DSC blocks without causing null-pointer >>> dereferences. >>> >>> Unfortunately it is not yet enough to get rid of completely corrupted >>> display output on the boards I tested here: >>> - Sony Xperia 1 (sm8150), 1644x3840 or 1096x2560 pixels; >>> - Sony Xperia 5II (sm8250), 1080x2520, at 60 or 120Hz; >>> - (can include more Xperia boards if desired) >>> >>> Both devices use the DUALPIPE_DSCMERGE topology downstream: dual LM, PP >>> and DSC, but only a single INTF/encoder/DSI-link. >>> >>> Hopefully this spawns some community/upstream interest to help rootcause >>> our corruption issues (after we open a drm/msm report on GitLab for more >>> appropriate tracking). >>> >>> The Sony Xperia XZ3 (sdm845) was fully tested and validated with this >>> series to not cause any regressions (an one of the math fixes now allows >>> us to change slice_count in the panel driver, which would corrupt >>> previously). >>> >>> Marijn Suijten (6): >>> drm/msm/dpu1: Implement DSC binding to PP block for CTL V1 >>> drm/msm/dpu1: Add DSC config for sm8150 and sm8250 >>> drm/msm/dpu1: Wire up DSC mask for active CTL configuration >>> drm/msm/dsi: Use DSC slice(s) packet size to compute word count >>> drm/msm/dsi: Flip greater-than check for slice_count and >>> slice_per_intf >>> drm/msm/dpu: Disallow unallocated (DSC) resources to be returned >> >> General comment: patches with Fixes ideally should come first. Usually >> they are picked into -fixes and/or stable kernels. If the Fixes patches >> are in the middle of the series, one can not be sure that they do not >> have dependencies on previous patches. If there is one, it should >> probably be stated clearly to ease work on backporting them. > > Ack, I may have rushed these RFC patches straight off my branches onto > the lists in hopes of sparking some suggestions on what may still be > broken or missing to get DSC working on sm[12]50, but will keep this in > mind for v2 after receiving some more review. > > That said, any suggestions?
From what I've noticed lately:
- set dsc_version_major/dsc_version_minor - try using dsc params from 1.2 rater than 1.1 version spec (there is small difference there)
-- With best wishes Dmitry
| |