From: "Souza, Jose" <jose.souza@intel.com>
To: "Mun, Gwan-gyeong" <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: "Nikula, Jani" <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
"zwisler@google.com" <zwisler@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:55:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fb8d93effa6f6e0512dc51902ccd2357b5edaf91.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d6bf9b47a2d88437d6e81f43bcac27305ab1ce19.camel@intel.com>
On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 12:39 +0000, Mun, Gwan-gyeong wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 12:39 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > Commit 60c6a14b489b ("drm/i915/display: Force the state compute
> > phase
> > once to enable PSR") was forcing the state compute too earlier
> > causing errors because not everything was initialized, so here
> > moving to i915_driver_register() when everything is ready and
> > driver
> > is registering into the rest of the system.
> >
> > Also fixing the place where it disarm the force probe as during the
> > atomic check phase errors could happen like the ones due locking
> > and
> > it would cause PSR to never be enabled if that happens.
> > Leaving the disarm to the atomic commit phase, intel_psr_enable()
> > or
> > intel_psr_update() will be called even if the current state do not
> > allow PSR to be enabled.
> >
> > v2: Check if intel_dp is null in intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set()
> > v3: Check intel_dp before get dev_priv
> >
> > Fixes: 60c6a14b489b ("drm/i915/display: Force the state compute
> > phase
> > once to enable PSR")
> > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1151
> > Tested-by: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@google.com>
> > Reported-by: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@google.com>
> > Cc: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 22
> > ++++++++++++++++++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 3 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +-
> > 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > index b4942b6445ae..2a0f7354fba5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > @@ -936,6 +936,8 @@ void intel_psr_enable(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp,
> > {
> > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dp_to_i915(intel_dp);
> >
> > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(intel_dp, false);
> > +
> Hi,
> intel_psr_enable() and intel_psr_update already have checking routine
> for CAN_PSR and has_psr.
> therefore we don't need to check twice here.
Minor overhead but if you really want I can remove the function call
and just do a dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed = false; for
intel_psr_enable/update
> And if there are no issues that moving "disarming force_mode_changed"
> to intel_psr_compute_config(),
> can we move them to intel_psr_compute_config()?
atomic check can fail at any point so we could disarm the mode_changed,
fail, retry(because the return was EAGAIN) and then PSR will not be
enabled.
>
> > if (!crtc_state->has_psr)
> > return;
> >
> > @@ -1096,6 +1098,8 @@ void intel_psr_update(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp,
> > struct i915_psr *psr = &dev_priv->psr;
> > bool enable, psr2_enable;
> >
> > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(intel_dp, false);
> > +
> > if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || READ_ONCE(psr->dp) != intel_dp)
> > return;
> >
> > @@ -1629,7 +1633,7 @@ void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct
> > drm_connector *connector,
> > struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state;
> >
> > if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || !new_state->crtc ||
> > - dev_priv->psr.initially_probed)
> > + !dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed)
> > return;
> >
> > intel_connector = to_intel_connector(connector);
> > @@ -1640,5 +1644,19 @@ void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct
> > drm_connector *connector,
> > crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(new_state->state,
> > new_state->crtc);
> > crtc_state->mode_changed = true;
> > - dev_priv->psr.initially_probed = true;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> > bool set)
> IMHO, it would be better intel_psr_set_force_mode_changed() as a
> function name.
Okay
> > +{
> > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv;
> > +
> > + if (!intel_dp)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + dev_priv = dp_to_i915(intel_dp);
> > + if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || !intel_dp_is_edp(intel_dp) ||
> > + intel_dp != dev_priv->psr.dp)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed = set;
> > }
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > index c58a1d438808..27a70468e2b9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > @@ -40,5 +40,6 @@ bool intel_psr_enabled(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp);
> > void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > struct drm_connector_state *old_state,
> > struct drm_connector_state *new_state);
> > +void intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> > bool set);
> >
> > #endif /* __INTEL_PSR_H__ */
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > index f7a1c33697b7..83791c197611 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@
> > #include "display/intel_hotplug.h"
> > #include "display/intel_overlay.h"
> > #include "display/intel_pipe_crc.h"
> > +#include "display/intel_psr.h"
> > #include "display/intel_sprite.h"
> > #include "display/intel_vga.h"
> >
> > @@ -1256,6 +1257,8 @@ static void i915_driver_register(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> >
> > intel_audio_init(dev_priv);
> >
> > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(dev_priv->psr.dp, true);
> > +
> > /*
> > * Some ports require correctly set-up hpd registers for
> > detection to
> > * work properly (leading to ghost connected connector status),
> > e.g. VGA
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 3330b538d379..a546655072bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ struct i915_psr {
> > bool dc3co_enabled;
> > u32 dc3co_exit_delay;
> > struct delayed_work dc3co_work;
> > - bool initially_probed;
> > + bool force_mode_changed;
> > };
> >
> > #define QUIRK_LVDS_SSC_DISABLE (1<<1)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-20 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-18 20:39 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization José Roberto de Souza
2020-02-19 2:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization (rev5) Patchwork
2020-02-20 12:39 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization Mun, Gwan-gyeong
2020-02-20 20:55 ` Souza, Jose [this message]
2020-02-21 15:46 ` Mun, Gwan-gyeong
2020-02-21 18:15 ` Souza, Jose
2020-02-21 19:59 ` Mun, Gwan-gyeong
2020-02-20 14:30 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization (rev5) Patchwork
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=fb8d93effa6f6e0512dc51902ccd2357b5edaf91.camel@intel.com \
--to=jose.souza@intel.com \
--cc=gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=zwisler@google.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.