On Thu, 2022-09-22 at 11:29 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 11:18:55AM +0300, Luca Coelho wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 19:52 +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > > > > > If pipe B is fused off we also shouldn't have FBC B. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c | 1 + > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c > > > index 1434dc33cf49..fbefebc023f1 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c > > > @@ -394,6 +394,7 @@ void intel_device_info_runtime_init(struct > > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > > if (dfsm & SKL_DFSM_PIPE_B_DISABLE) { > > > runtime->pipe_mask &= ~BIT(PIPE_B); > > > runtime->cpu_transcoder_mask &= ~BIT(TRANSCODER_B); > > > + runtime->fbc_mask &= ~BIT(INTEL_FBC_B); > > > } > > > if (dfsm & SKL_DFSM_PIPE_C_DISABLE) { > > > runtime->pipe_mask &= ~BIT(PIPE_C); > > > > I don't know (yet) what exactly this does, but it makes sense if you > > think of consistency: we already do that for PIPE_A. > > It's basically saying the entire pipe is fused off, so anything > living inside that pipe should also be fused off. > > > > > But what about PIPE_C and PIPE_D? Wouldn't it make sense to do the same > > thing for them as well? > > There is no FBC engine on those pipes (we don't even have > the INTEL_FBC_C+ enum values defined), at least for now. >
Okay, but AFAICT INTEL_FBC_B was defined but not really used directly anywhere. So wouldn't it make sense to add this for pipes C and D as well? Then, if you ever just need to check if the pipe supports FBC, you could just check that bit, without making any other assumptions. -- Cheers, Luca.
