Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/msm: DSC Electric Boogaloo for sm8[12]50

[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