github-mirror/linux
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git synced 2026-05-25 07:33:19 +02:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity Graph

drm/i915/dsb: Move the +1 usec adjustment into dsb_wait_usec()

Browse Source 
The "wait usec" DSB command doesn't quite seem to able to
guarantee that it always waits at least the specified
amount of usecs. Some of that could be just because it
supposedly just does some kind of dumb timestamp comparison
internally. But I also see cases where two hardware timestamps
sampled on each side of the "wait usec" command come out one
less than expected. So it looks like we always need at least a
+1 to guarantee that we never wait less than specified. Always
apply that adjustment in dsb_wait_usec().

Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20250207223159.14132-2-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
Ville Syrjälä 2025-02-08 00:31:52 +02:00
parent 46e2ffbdd2
commit 26b3a8b25e
1 changed files with 3 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

5
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
View File

@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ void intel_dsb_interrupt(struct intel_dsb *dsb)
void intel_dsb_wait_usec(struct intel_dsb *dsb, int count)
{
intel_dsb_emit(dsb, count,
/* +1 to make sure we never wait less time than asked for */
intel_dsb_emit(dsb, count + 1,
DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_USEC << DSB_OPCODE_SHIFT);
}
@ -622,7 +623,7 @@ void intel_dsb_wait_vblank_delay(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state =
intel_pre_commit_crtc_state(state, crtc);
int usecs = intel_scanlines_to_usecs(&crtc_state->hw.adjusted_mode,
dsb_vblank_delay(state, crtc)) + 1;
dsb_vblank_delay(state, crtc));
intel_dsb_wait_usec(dsb, usecs);
}