All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Todd Previte <tprevite@gmail.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Update intel_dp_hpd_pulse() to check link status for non-MST operation
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 08:34:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54FDBD99.1000901@virtuousgeek.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150306163433.GY18775@phenom.ffwll.local>

On 03/06/2015 08:34 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 11:22:19AM -0700, Todd Previte wrote:
>> Update the hot plug function to handle the SST case. Instead of placing
>> the SST case within the long/short pulse block, it is now handled after
>> determining that MST mode is not in use. This way, the topology management
>> layer can handle any MST-related operations while SST operations are still
>> correctly handled afterwards.
>>
>> This patch also corrects the problem of SST mode only being handled in the
>> case of a short (0.5ms - 1.0ms) HPD pulse. For compliance testing purposes
>> both short and long pulses are used by the different tests, thus both cases
>> need to be addressed for SST.
>>
>> This patch replaces [PATCH 10/10] drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_hot_plug() in the
>> previous compliance testing patch sequence. Review feedback on that patch
>> indicated that updating intel_dp_hot_plug() was not the correct place for
>> the test handler.
>>
>> For the SST case, the main stream is disabled for long HPD pulses as this
>> generally indicates either a connect/disconnect event or link failure. For
>> a number of case in compliance testing, the source is required to disable
>> the main link upon detection of a long HPD.
>>
>> V2:
>> - N/A
>> V3:
>> - Place the SST mode link status check into the mst_fail case
>> - Remove obsolete comment regarding SST mode operation
>> - Removed an erroneous line of code that snuck in during rebasing
>> V4:
>> - Added a disable of the main stream (DP transport) for the long pulse case
>>   for SST to support compliance testing
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Todd PRevite <tprevite@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 25 +++++++++++++++----------
>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> index 080cc23..2460d14 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -4618,16 +4618,6 @@ intel_dp_hpd_pulse(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port, bool long_hpd)
>>  			if (intel_dp_check_mst_status(intel_dp) == -EINVAL)
>>  				goto mst_fail;
>>  		}
>> -
>> -		if (!intel_dp->is_mst) {
>> -			/*
>> -			 * we'll check the link status via the normal hot plug path later -
>> -			 * but for short hpds we should check it now
>> -			 */
>> -			drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL);
>> -			intel_dp_check_link_status(intel_dp);
>> -			drm_modeset_unlock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex);
>> -		}
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
>> @@ -4639,6 +4629,21 @@ mst_fail:
>>  		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("MST device may have disappeared %d vs %d\n", intel_dp->is_mst, intel_dp->mst_mgr.mst_state);
>>  		intel_dp->is_mst = false;
>>  		drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_set_mst(&intel_dp->mst_mgr, intel_dp->is_mst);
>> +	} else {
>> +		/* SST mode - handle short/long pulses here */
>> +		drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL);
>> +		/* Clear compliance testing flags/data here to prevent
>> +		 * false detection in userspace */
>> +		intel_dp->compliance_test_data = 0;
>> +		intel_dp->compliance_testing_active = 0;
>> +		/* For a long pulse in SST mode, disable the main link */
>> +		if (long_hpd) {
>> +			I915_WRITE(DP_TP_CTL(intel_dig_port->port),
>> +					      ~DP_TP_CTL_ENABLE);
>> +		}
> 
> Disabling the  main link should be done in userspace. All long pulse
> requests should be forwarded to userspace as a hotplug event. Userspace
> can then react to that hotplug appropriately. This way we can again
> exercise the normal operation of all our dp code.

What's your concern here?  Do you want to make sure we get coverage on
dp_link_down()?  It looks like that might be safe to use here instead of
flipping the disable bit directly.  Or did you want to go through the
whole pipe/port shutdown sequence as well?  If so, I think the dpms
tests will already cover that, separate from simple compliance.

Jesse
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-09 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-19  3:00 Displayport Compliance Testing V3 Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 1/9] drm/i915: Add automated testing support for Displayport compliance testing Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 2/9] drm/i915: Update intel_dp_check_link_status() " Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 3/9] drm/i915: Add a delay in Displayport AUX transactions for " Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 4/9] drm/i915: Add debugfs functions for Displayport " Todd Previte
2015-03-09 17:57   ` Jani Nikula
2015-03-11 17:19     ` Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 5/9] drm/i915: Update the EDID automated compliance test function Todd Previte
2015-02-26 17:40   ` [PATCH 5/9 V4] " Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 6/9] drm/i915: Update intel_dp_compute_config() to handle compliance test requests Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 7/9] drm/i915: Update intel_dp_hpd_pulse() to check link status for non-MST operation Todd Previte
2015-03-05 18:22   ` [PATCH] " Todd Previte
2015-03-06 16:34     ` Daniel Vetter
2015-03-09 15:34       ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2015-03-09 17:29         ` Daniel Vetter
2015-03-09 19:07           ` Jesse Barnes
2015-03-09 21:04             ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-03-11 18:37               ` Jesse Barnes
2015-03-11 19:10                 ` Ville Syrjälä
2015-03-11 19:38                   ` Daniel Vetter
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 8/9] drm/i915: Add new debugfs file for Displaypor compliance test control Todd Previte
2015-02-19  3:00 ` [PATCH 9/9] drm/i915: Add debugfs write and test param parsing functions for DP " Todd Previte
2015-02-19  5:55   ` shuang.he

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=54FDBD99.1000901@virtuousgeek.org \
    --to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=tprevite@gmail.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.