Re: [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).

From: "Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: "Antognolli, Rafael" <rafael.antognolli@intel.com>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:05:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1438121524.2444.47.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150728202539.GD5902@intel.com>

On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 13:25 -0700, Rafael Antognolli wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:35:50PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > By Vesa DP 1.2 spec TEST_CRC_COUNT is a "4 bit wrap counter which
> > increments each time the TEST_CRC_x_x are updated."
> > 
> > However if we are trying to verify the screen hasn't changed we get
> > same (count, crc) pair twice. Without this patch we would return
> > -ETIMEOUT in this case.
> > 
> > So, if in 6 vblanks the pair (count, crc) hasn't changed we
> > return it anyway instead of returning error and let test case decide
> > if it was right or not.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> 
> Looks good.
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > index c7372a1..e99ec7a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > @@ -4028,6 +4028,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
> >  	u8 buf;
> >  	int count, ret;
> >  	int attempts = 6;
> > +	bool old_equal_new;
> >  
> >  	ret = intel_dp_sink_crc_start(intel_dp);
> >  	if (ret)
> > @@ -4042,6 +4043,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
> >  			goto stop;
> >  		}
> >  		count = buf & DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
> > +
> >  		/*
> >  		 * Count might be reset during the loop. In this case
> >  		 * last known count needs to be reset as well.
> > @@ -4053,17 +4055,24 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
> >  			ret = -EIO;
> >  			goto stop;
> >  		}
> > -	} while (--attempts && (count == 0 || (count == intel_dp->sink_crc.last_count &&
> > -					       !memcmp(intel_dp->sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
> > -						       6 * sizeof(u8)))));
> > +
> > +		old_equal_new = (count == intel_dp->sink_crc.last_count &&
> > +				 !memcmp(intel_dp->sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
> > +					 6 * sizeof(u8)));
> > +
> > +	} while (--attempts && (count == 0 || old_equal_new));
> >  
> >  	intel_dp->sink_crc.last_count = buf & DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
> >  	memcpy(intel_dp->sink_crc.last_crc, crc, 6 * sizeof(u8));
> >  
> >  	if (attempts == 0) {
> > -		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Panel is unable to calculate CRC after 6 vblanks\n");
> > -		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > -		goto stop;
> > +		if (old_equal_new) {
> > +			DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Unreliable Sink CRC counter: Current returned CRC is identical to the previous one\n");
> 
> Isn't this line a little too long?

I agree, but I had no idea how to make it shorter. I believe this long
debug message is the only case where we can go over 80 characters in
i915. but if it isn't true and/or have a suggestion how to make it
shorter please let me know that I can change.

> 
> > +		} else {
> > +			DRM_ERROR("Panel is unable to calculate any CRC after 6 vblanks\n");
> > +			ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > +			goto stop;
> > +		}
> >  	}
> >  
> >  stop:
> > -- 
> > 2.1.0
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

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