Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6932BC7EE2E for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2023 00:16:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229644AbjBZAQV (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:16:21 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40180 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229562AbjBZAQT (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:16:19 -0500 Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E3B514E8F; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 16:16:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0279867.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 31Q00NfJ015119; Sun, 26 Feb 2023 00:16:03 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=qcppdkim1; bh=35muwSCUtuPsvNbRk3WyZqi1DQAVgPWtAY8EKeE/V10=; b=Ig2OJnaQWsUV/SeWIoUT1Vt6jzJySwQ5CJGGVkAhpY0JChnTMVKlAW+9/eTkOOSmKynB SuLscpmb4BEcx4IDiq+aAQWwhAxWQULoChomUuF3JGm1EToxsn9aILX27R5WQjlR2ZVW 8WPYJyM/J/zYJAFLG9mkrWOqYJoEmqeT/4nq5huwDcNcNNJxvFliOlw5c8p9DlS8xikP QIlttYdd43xn4uEk2cRayyjBLDL6basJtbOv/sEMgNkRXXTZvH/XpsLnzhxxhmpA56Jb O0fUW/T9KcF+MmG+GFPpTQ36Muv4JKnLC045IsrqMXFpOz2naRMgocjGV4Igv3WwsckD LQ== Received: from nalasppmta04.qualcomm.com (Global_NAT1.qualcomm.com [129.46.96.20]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3ny81q9vqg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 26 Feb 2023 00:16:03 +0000 Received: from nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com [10.47.209.196]) by NALASPPMTA04.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 31Q0G2j0002994 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 26 Feb 2023 00:16:02 GMT Received: from [10.110.89.76] (10.80.80.8) by nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.209.196) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.986.41; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 16:16:01 -0800 Message-ID: <7650f183-9860-9074-e5d5-539afdf41248@quicinc.com> Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 16:16:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.2 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] drm/msm/dpu: add dsc helper functions Content-Language: en-US To: Dmitry Baryshkov , Kuogee Hsieh CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <1677267647-28672-1-git-send-email-quic_khsieh@quicinc.com> <1677267647-28672-2-git-send-email-quic_khsieh@quicinc.com> <42b3c193-8897-cfe9-1cae-2f9a66f7983a@linaro.org> <1b5afec9-454d-e1b9-0274-f0476edb4d21@quicinc.com> From: Abhinav Kumar In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8] X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) To nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.209.196) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: O4notuUZSk1pgo_Z_iXzcnhWBMFM3xjE X-Proofpoint-GUID: O4notuUZSk1pgo_Z_iXzcnhWBMFM3xjE X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.219,Aquarius:18.0.930,Hydra:6.0.562,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-02-25_14,2023-02-24_01,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2212070000 definitions=main-2302260000 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Dmitry On 2/24/2023 3:57 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 at 01:51, Kuogee Hsieh wrote: >> >> >> On 2/24/2023 1:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>> On 24/02/2023 21:40, Kuogee Hsieh wrote: >>>> Add DSC helper functions based on DSC configuration profiles to produce >>>> DSC related runtime parameters through both table look up and runtime >>>> calculation to support DSC on DPU. >>>> >>>> There are 6 different DSC configuration profiles are supported >>>> currently. >>>> DSC configuration profiles are differiented by 5 keys, DSC version >>>> (V1.1), >>>> chroma (444/422/420), colorspace (RGB/YUV), bpc(8/10), >>>> bpp (6/7/7.5/8/9/10/12/15) and SCR (0/1). >>>> >>>> Only DSC version V1.1 added and V1.2 will be added later. >>> >>> These helpers should go to drivers/gpu/drm/display/drm_dsc_helper.c >>> Also please check that they can be used for i915 or for amdgpu >>> (ideally for both of them). >>> >>> I didn't check the tables against the standard (or against the current >>> source code), will do that later. >>> >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kuogee Hsieh >>>> --- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/Makefile | 1 + >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.c | 209 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.h | 34 ++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 244 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.c >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.h >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/Makefile >>>> index 7274c412..28cf52b 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/Makefile >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/Makefile >>>> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ msm-$(CONFIG_DRM_MSM_DPU) += \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.o \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_ctl.o \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_dsc.o \ >>>> + disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.o \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_interrupts.o \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.o \ >>>> disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_lm.o \ >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.c >>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.c >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 00000000..88207e9 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_dsc_helper.c >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,209 @@ >>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >>>> +/* >>>> + * Copyright (c) 2023. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights >>>> reserved >>>> + */ >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> +#include "msm_drv.h" >>>> +#include "dpu_kms.h" >>>> +#include "dpu_hw_dsc.h" >>>> +#include "dpu_dsc_helper.h" >>>> + >>>> + >>> >>> Extra empty line >>> >>>> +#define DPU_DSC_PPS_SIZE 128 >>>> + >>>> +enum dpu_dsc_ratio_type { >>>> + DSC_V11_8BPC_8BPP, >>>> + DSC_V11_10BPC_8BPP, >>>> + DSC_V11_10BPC_10BPP, >>>> + DSC_V11_SCR1_8BPC_8BPP, >>>> + DSC_V11_SCR1_10BPC_8BPP, >>>> + DSC_V11_SCR1_10BPC_10BPP, >>>> + DSC_RATIO_TYPE_MAX >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> + >>>> +static u16 dpu_dsc_rc_buf_thresh[DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES - 1] = { >>>> + 0x0e, 0x1c, 0x2a, 0x38, 0x46, 0x54, >>>> + 0x62, 0x69, 0x70, 0x77, 0x79, 0x7b, 0x7d, 0x7e >>> >>> Weird indentation >>> >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> +/* >>>> + * Rate control - Min QP values for each ratio type in >>>> dpu_dsc_ratio_type >>>> + */ >>>> +static char >>>> dpu_dsc_rc_range_min_qp[DSC_RATIO_TYPE_MAX][DSC_NUM_BUF_RANGES] = { >>>> + /* DSC v1.1 */ >>>> + {0, 0, 1, 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 7, 13}, >>>> + {0, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 17}, >>>> + {0, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 15}, >>>> + /* DSC v1.1 SCR and DSC v1.2 RGB 444 */ >>> >>> What is SCR? Is there any reason to use older min/max Qp params >>> instead of always using the ones from the VESA-DSC-1.1 standard? >> >> Standards change request, some vendors may use scr to work with their panel. >> >> These table value are provided by system team. > > So, what will happen if we use values from 1.2 standard (aka 1.1 SCR > 1) with the older panel? > Standards change request means fixing errors/errata for the given standard. Those are typically released as a different spec. So I referred the DSC 1.1 SCR spec, and it does have a few differences in the table compared to DSC 1.1 which will get into DSC 1.2. Hence the table entries are same between DSC 1.1 SCR and DSC 1.2 You are right, ideally DSC 1.2 should be backwards compatible with DSC 1.1 in terms of the values (thats what the spec says too) but I am not sure if we can expect every panel/DP monitor to be forward compatible without any SW change because it might need some firmware update (for the panel) or SW update to support that especially during transitions of the spec revisions (SCR to be precise). Typically we do below for DP monitors exactly for the same reason: DSC_ver_to_use = min(what_we_support, what_DP_monitor_supports) and use that table. For DSI panels, typically in the panel spec it should say whether the SCR version needs to be used because we have seen that for some panels ( I dont remember exactly which one ) based on which panel and which revision of the panel, it might not. Thats why downstream started adding qcom,mdss-dsc-scr-version to the devicetree. >>>> + {0, 0, 1, 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 9, 12}, >>>> + {0, 4, 5, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 13, 16}, >>>> + {0, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 11, 15}, > >