From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm: give up on edid retries when i2c
 bus is not responding
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:43:03 +0100
Message-ID: <20120105144303.GC3831@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1325763269-7245-1-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
	[209.85.212.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969FB9E73F
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Thu,  5 Jan 2012 06:41:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wibhq15 with SMTP id hq15so475211wib.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Thu, 05 Jan 2012 06:41:03 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1325763269-7245-1-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:34:28AM -0200, Eugeni Dodonov wrote:
> This allows to avoid talking to a non-responding bus repeatedly until we
> finally timeout after 15 attempts. We can do this by catching the -ENXIO
> error, provided by i2c_algo_bit:bit_doAddress call.
> 
> Within the bit_doAddress we already try 3 times to get the edid data, so
> if the routine tells us that bus is not responding, it is mostly pointless
> to keep re-trying those attempts over and over again until we reach final
> number of retries.
> 
> This change should fix https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41059
> and improve overall edid detection timing by 10-30% in most cases, and by
> a much larger margin in case of phantom outputs (up to 30x in one worst
> case).
> 
> Timing results for i915-powered machines for 'time xrandr' command:
> Machine 1: from 0.840s to 0.290s
> Machine 2: from 0.315s to 0.280s
> Machine 3: from +/- 4s to 0.184s
> 
> Timing results for HD5770 with 'time xrandr' command:
> Machine 4: from 3.210s to 1.060s
> 
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@hchris-wilson.co.uk>
> Reviewed-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>
> Tested-by: Sean Finney <seanius@seanius.net>
> Tested-by: Soren Hansen <soren@linux2go.dk>
> Tested-by: Hernando Torque <sirius@sonnenkinder.org>
> Tested-by: Mike Lothian <mike@fireburn.co.uk>
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41059
> Signed-off-by: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>

Imo it's too late for such a change with decent potential to blow up to
land in 3.3. I think this needs some decent shakeout time in Dave's
drm-next tree (despite all r-b's and tested-bys it already gathered) and
hence is imo 3.4 material at this stage.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48