From: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] RFC: Potential improvements in edid detection timings (v2)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 19:00:40 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1318024842-2996-1-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com> (raw)
(Resending with small improvements - also sending to dri-devel for feedback).
This is the the forth iteration of potential fixes for slow edid detection
issues over non-existent outputs
(https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41059) - the previous versions
were posted to the bug and were used mostly for debugging the problem.
The problem I attempted to fix here is that some systems would take a very
long time trying to locate all the possible video outputs - in in cases
where such outputs were bogus, this lead to timing out after all the
possible delays were done.
After investigation, I came to think on two different ways to fix the issue:
- The first patch does a one-line fix in drm_edid.c. I added a check for the
return value of i2c_transfer - and, if it is -ENXIO, we give up on further
attempts as the bus is not there. A drawback to this approach is that it
affects all the devices out there which use drm_get_edid. From my testing,
the -ENXIO gave no false positives, but I haven't tested it on non-Intel
cards. So I'd like to hear what other drm developers think about that.
- The second patch does a similar procedure within the i915 driver, in case
the proposed change to drm_edid.c won't be adequate for other drivers. It
adds a new function - intel_drm_get_valid_edid - which attempts to do a
simple i2c transfer over the bus prior to calling drm_get_edid. In case such
transfer fails with -ENXIO, it is a signal that the bus is not there, so we
shouldn't waste any time trying to communicate with it further.
Note that those patches provide lots of dmesg pollution - for the final
version those printk'ss should probably be removed, but I left them
intentionally with KERN_DEBUG in order to see when the adapters come and go
during the debugging and testing.
According to testing performed at
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41059, the following results
were obtained with those patches:
System1:
(testing all possible outputs)
ubuntu 3.0.0-12.19: 840ms
3.0.0-12.19 + drm patch: 290ms
3.0.0-12.19 + i915 patch: 290ms
(manually ignoring phantom outputs)
ubuntu 3.0.0-12.19: 690ms
3.0.0-12.19 + drm patch: 140ms
3.0.0-12.19 + i915 patch: 140ms
System2:
(testing all possible outputs)
ubuntu 3.0.0-12.19: 315ms
3.0.0-12.19 + drm patch: 280ms
3.0.0-12.19 + i915 patch: 280ms
(manually ignoring phantom outputs)
ubuntu 3.0.0-12.19: 175ms
3.0.0-12.19 + drm patch: 140ms
3.0.0-12.19 + i915 patch: 140ms
Eugeni Dodonov (2):
Give up on edid retries when i2c tells us that bus is not there
Check if the bus is valid prior to discovering edid.
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 5 +++++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 4 ++--
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 2 ++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c | 4 ++--
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_modes.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c | 4 ++--
8 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--
1.7.6.3
next reply other threads:[~2011-10-07 22:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-07 22:00 Eugeni Dodonov [this message]
2011-10-07 22:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] Give up on edid retries when i2c tells us that bus is not there Eugeni Dodonov
2011-10-07 22:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] Check if the bus is valid prior to discovering edid Eugeni Dodonov
2011-10-08 22:13 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ben Widawsky
2011-10-10 12:20 ` Eugeni Dodonov
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=1318024842-2996-1-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com \
--to=eugeni.dodonov@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox