From: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Wait for vblank after register read
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:15:35 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1524222935.16539.27.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87lgdie17i.fsf@intel.com>
On Fri, 2018-04-20 at 11:22 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2018, Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 17:09 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > When reading out CRC's we wait for a vblank on
> > > > intel_dp_sink_crc_start()
> > > > function. When we start reading out CRC's in
> > > > intel_dp_sink_crc()
> > > > loop we
> > > > first wait for a vblank yielding that all in all we end up
> > > > waiting
> > > > two
> > > > vblanks on the first iteration round. Therefore, let's move the
> > > > intel_wait_for_vblank() as the last routine that we do in an
> > > > iteration loop
> > > > in intel_dp_sink_crc().
> > > >
> > > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
> > > Umm, do the CI failures in the bug really use sink crc, or are
> > > they
> > > rather about pipe crc?
> > >
> > The bug is more on pipe crc. This just caught my attention while I
> > was
> > looking into these bugs.
> I think the practice we've adopted is,
>
> Bugzilla: <bug that this patch should fix>
>
> References: <bug or something else that this patch is related to>
Got it :) I try to remember this notation.
>
> >
> > Was there a reason why we need to wait two vblanks here before
> > running
> > the loop?
> I can't remember by heart. I'm not sure if it would make more sense
> to
> remove the vblank wait from intel_dp_sink_crc_start() instead. Even
> with
> your patch, there'll still be an extra vblank wait, you just move it
> to
> a different place.
We could remove vblank wait form intel_dp_sink_crc_start(). Maybe that
would be more logical place for the removal. As CI runs pointed out
this patch didn't fix the actual bug so should I drop this change or
should we still try optimize the code a bit?
Cheers,
Mika
>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > Jani.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 5 +++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > > index 62f82c4..6eb97fa 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > > @@ -3972,13 +3972,14 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp, struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_s
> > > > return ret;
> > > >
> > > > do {
> > > > - intel_wait_for_vblank(dev_priv, intel_crtc-
> > > > >pipe);
> > > > -
> > > > if (drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&intel_dp->aux,
> > > > DP_TEST_SINK_MISC, &buf)
> > > > <
> > > > 0) {
> > > > ret = -EIO;
> > > > goto stop;
> > > > }
> > > > +
> > > > + intel_wait_for_vblank(dev_priv, intel_crtc-
> > > > >pipe);
> > > > +
> > > > count = buf & DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
> > > >
> > > > } while (--attempts && count == 0);
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-20 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-18 7:56 [PATCH] drm/i915: Wait for vblank after register read Mika Kahola
2018-04-18 14:32 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2018-04-18 18:00 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2018-04-19 6:11 ` [PATCH] " Lofstedt, Marta
2018-04-19 7:03 ` Mika Kahola
2018-04-20 18:15 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2018-04-20 20:56 ` Dhinakaran Pandiyan
2018-04-24 8:14 ` Mika Kahola
2018-04-19 14:09 ` Jani Nikula
2018-04-20 6:42 ` Mika Kahola
2018-04-20 8:22 ` Jani Nikula
2018-04-20 11:15 ` Mika Kahola [this message]
2018-04-23 19:21 ` Dhinakaran Pandiyan
2018-04-23 19:34 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2018-04-23 20:24 ` Dhinakaran Pandiyan
2018-04-23 20:17 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2018-04-24 7:41 ` Jani Nikula
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=1524222935.16539.27.camel@intel.com \
--to=mika.kahola@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox