From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: don't return -ENXIO from gmbus xfer
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 20:16:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120520181553.GE5145@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGS+omCnwFf-uKiQewMnprPJ5maSjS9ROeyoRTiYd_JRBjSBiQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 11:07:46AM -0700, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:10:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > ... too much risk for flaky edid transfers.
> > >
> > > This regression has been introduced in
> > >
> > > commit e646d5773572bf52017983d758bdf05777dc5600
> > > Author: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
> > > Date: Fri Mar 30 19:46:38 2012 +0800
> > >
> > > drm/i915/intel_i2c: always wait for IDLE before clearing NAK
> > >
> > > This patch keeps the improved NAK handling on the hw side, but reverts
> > > the change to return -ENXIO in case the gmbus controller reports a
> > > NAK.
> > >
> > > Cc: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@chromium.org>
> >
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > Can you please take a look at this one and smash your r-b onto it if you
> > agree?
> >
> > Thanks, Daniel
> >
> > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49518
> > > Reported-and-Tested-by: Julian Simioni <julian.simioni@gmail.com>
> > > Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 7 ++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > > index e04255e..0588d8e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > > @@ -418,10 +418,11 @@ clear_err:
> > > * If no ACK is received during the address phase of a transaction,
> > > * the adapter must report -ENXIO.
> > > * It is not clear what to return if no ACK is received at other times.
> > > - * So, we always return -ENXIO in all NAK cases, to ensure we send
> > > - * it at least during the one case that is specified.
> > > + *
> > > + * Unfortunately we can't afford false positives in returning -ENXIO,
> > > + * hence never return -ENXIO.
> > > */
> > > - ret = -ENXIO;
> > > + ret = i;
>
>
> The bugzilla report shows that in the old case, the gmbus failure was:
> [ 2.528812] vgaarb: device changed decodes:
> PCI:0000:00:02.0,olddecodes=io+mem,decodes=io+mem:owns=io+mem
> [ 2.540753] [drm] GMBUS [i915 gmbus panel] timed out waiting for idle
> [ 2.580813] [drm:intel_panel_get_backlight], get backlight PWM = 0
>
> And now the failure is:
> [ 2.523015] vgaarb: device changed decodes:
> PCI:0000:00:02.0,olddecodes=io+mem,decodes=io+mem:owns=io+mem
> [ 2.534770] [drm] GMBUS [i915 gmbus panel] timed out after NAK
> [ 2.534797] [drm:gmbus_xfer], GMBUS [i915 gmbus panel] NAK for
> addr: 0050 w(1)
> [ 2.534883] [drm:intel_panel_get_backlight], get backlight PWM = 0
>
> From these logs, it looks like in both cases, there is an i2c
> communication error between host and panel. The difference is that:
> * in the old case, the return value was 0, which triggered a silent
> retry (the 40ms gap between GMBUS and PWM messages)
> * but, now that the return value is -ENXIO, the caller does not retry.
>
> Actually, in the 'new' case, there are two errors happening: a NAK and
> then a timeout after the NAK, while waiting for the controller to
> clear the ACTIVE bit. I'm not actually sure what causes "timeout
> after NAK", but I think it means the controller is waiting for entire
> transaction to complete (perhaps the STOP bit after NAK?).
>
> Since this reported issue is happening in this double error path, I'd
> rather a patch that fixes it without disabling the more generic NAK
> path. Maybe something like this:
Hm, good suggestion. This way, if we get a NAK but no issues later on,
we'll still fail faster if gmbus detected that no device is responding.
Which should speed up boot a bit. I'll run this past the bug reporter.
Thanks, Daniel
>
> clear_err:
> /*
> * Wait for bus to IDLE before clearing NAK.
> * If we clear the NAK while bus is still active, then it will stay
> * active and the next transaction may fail.
> */
> + ret = -ENXIO;
> if (wait_for((I915_READ(GMBUS2 + reg_offset) & GMBUS_ACTIVE) == 0,
> - 10))
> + 10)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("GMBUS [%s] timed out after NAK\n",
> adapter->name);
> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT; // Or 0 ?
> + }
>
> /* Toggle the Software Clear Interrupt bit. This has the effect
> * of resetting the GMBUS controller and so clearing the
> * BUS_ERROR raised by the slave's NAK.
> */
> I915_WRITE(GMBUS1 + reg_offset, GMBUS_SW_CLR_INT);
> I915_WRITE(GMBUS1 + reg_offset, 0);
> I915_WRITE(GMBUS0 + reg_offset, 0);
>
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("GMBUS [%s] NAK for addr: %04x %c(%d)\n",
> adapter->name, msgs[i].addr,
> (msgs[i].flags & I2C_M_RD) ? 'r' : 'w', msgs[i].len);
>
> /*
> * If no ACK is received during the address phase of a transaction,
> * the adapter must report -ENXIO.
> * It is not clear what to return if no ACK is received at other times.
> - * So, we always return -ENXIO in all NAK cases, to ensure we send
> - * it at least during the one case that is specified.
> + * So, return -ENXIO for NAK after any byte, unless there was a timeout
> + * while waiting for IDLE after NAK.
> */
> - ret = -ENXIO;
> goto out;
>
> -Daniel
>
> >
> > > goto out;
> > >
> > > timeout:
> > > --
> > > 1.7.10
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Vetter
> > Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
> > Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-20 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-14 5:56 [PATCH] drm/i915: don't return -ENXIO from gmbus xfer Daniel Vetter
2012-05-19 20:10 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-05-20 15:19 ` Daniel Vetter
[not found] ` <CAGS+omCnwFf-uKiQewMnprPJ5maSjS9ROeyoRTiYd_JRBjSBiQ@mail.gmail.com>
2012-05-20 18:16 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2012-05-21 18:19 ` [PATCH] drm/i915: be more careful when returning -ENXIO in gmbus transfer Daniel Vetter
2012-05-21 18:24 ` Chris Wilson
[not found] ` <CAGS+omANiYtmKX_z2m2J-5j7a-K0z2MJ=wE3PcZRATmyh_VGxQ@mail.gmail.com>
2012-05-21 19:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-05-21 18:20 ` [PATCH] drm/i915: don't return -ENXIO from gmbus xfer Daniel Vetter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120520181553.GE5145@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=djkurtz@chromium.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.