From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: tarun.vyas@intel.com
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] drm/i915: Rework "Potential atomic update error" to handle PSR exit
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:41:57 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180426134157.GL23723@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180426021009.178880-1-tarun.vyas@intel.com>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 07:10:09PM -0700, tarun.vyas@intel.com wrote:
> From: Tarun <tarun.vyas@intel.com>
>
> The Display scanline counter freezes on PSR entry. Inside
> intel_pipe_update_start, once Vblank interrupts are enabled, we start
> exiting PSR, but by the time the scanline counter is read, we may not
> have completely exited PSR which leads us to schedule out and check back
> later.
> On ChromeOS-4.4 kernel, which is fairly up-to-date w.r.t drm/i915 but
> lags w.r.t core kernel code, hot plugging an external display triggers
> tons of "potential atomic update errors" in the dmesg, on *pipe A*. A
> closer analysis reveals that we try to read the scanline 3 times and
> eventually timeout, b/c PSR hasn't exited fully leading to a PIPEDSL stuck @
> 1599.
> This issue is not seen on upstream kernels, b/c for *some* reason we
> loop inside intel_pipe_update start for ~2+ msec which in this case is
> more than enough to exit PSR fully, hence an *unstuck* PIPEDSL counter,
> hence no error. On the other hand, the ChromeOS kernel spends ~1.1 msec
> looping inside intel_pipe_update_start and hence errors out b/c the
> source is still in PSR.
>
> If PSR is enabled, then we should *wait* for the PSR
> state to move to IDLE before re-reading the PIPEDSL so as to avoid bogus
> and annoying "potential atomic update error" messages.
>
> P.S: This scenario applies to a configuration with an additional pipe,
> as of now.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tarun <tarun.vyas@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> index aa1dfaa692b9..77dd3b936131 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> @@ -92,11 +92,13 @@ void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
> const struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode = &new_crtc_state->base.adjusted_mode;
> long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies_timeout(1);
> - int scanline, min, max, vblank_start;
> + int scanline, min, max, vblank_start, old_scanline, new_scanline;
> + bool retried = false;
> wait_queue_head_t *wq = drm_crtc_vblank_waitqueue(&crtc->base);
> bool need_vlv_dsi_wa = (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev_priv) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv)) &&
> intel_crtc_has_type(new_crtc_state, INTEL_OUTPUT_DSI);
> DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> + old_scanline = new_scanline = -1;
>
> vblank_start = adjusted_mode->crtc_vblank_start;
> if (adjusted_mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE)
> @@ -126,15 +128,24 @@ void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
> * read the scanline.
> */
> prepare_to_wait(wq, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> -
> +retry:
> scanline = intel_get_crtc_scanline(crtc);
> + old_scanline = new_scanline, new_scanline = scanline;
> +
> if (scanline < min || scanline > max)
> break;
>
> if (timeout <= 0) {
> - DRM_ERROR("Potential atomic update failure on pipe %c\n",
> + if(!i915.enable_psr || retried) {
> + DRM_ERROR("Potential atomic update failure on pipe %c\n",
> pipe_name(crtc->pipe));
> - break;
> + break;
> + }
> + else if(old_scanline == new_scanline && !retried) {
> + retried = true;
> + intel_wait_for_register(dev_priv, EDP_PSR_STATUS_CTL, EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_MASK, EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_IDLE, 10);
What's the point of obfuscating the loop with this stuff?
Just wait for the PSR exit before we even enter the loop?
> + goto retry;
> + }
> }
>
> local_irq_enable();
> --
> 2.13.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-26 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-26 2:10 [RFC] drm/i915: Rework "Potential atomic update error" to handle PSR exit tarun.vyas
2018-04-26 2:31 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2018-04-26 13:41 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2018-04-26 17:47 ` [RFC] " Dhinakaran Pandiyan
[not found] ` <20180426213904.GA50779@otc-chromeosbuild-5>
2018-04-27 3:09 ` Tarun Vyas
2018-04-27 12:41 ` Ville Syrjälä
2018-04-27 13:02 ` Chris Wilson
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=20180426134157.GL23723@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=tarun.vyas@intel.com \
/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.