From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: clear up backlight inversion
 confusion on gen4
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 17:22:50 +0200
Message-ID: <20120423152250.GJ4935@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1335173535-14811-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<4F9542EF.3010208@osadl.org>
	<20120423123257.GE4935@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<20120423123619.GF4935@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<4F9555D6.2020708@osadl.org>
	<20120423133934.GG4935@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<4F956077.3040103@osadl.org>
	<20120423142205.GI4935@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<4F95700D.9080609@osadl.org>
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-ee0-f49.google.com (mail-ee0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CD09E730
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:21:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eekb45 with SMTP id b45so3165601eek.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:21:50 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F95700D.9080609@osadl.org>
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: Carsten Emde <C.Emde@osadl.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 05:06:53PM +0200, Carsten Emde wrote:
> On 04/23/2012 04:22 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 04:00:23PM +0200, Carsten Emde wrote:
> >># intel_reg_write 0x61250 0x80000000
> >>Value before: 0xE0000000
> >>Value after: 0x80000000
> >># intel_reg_read 0x61254
> >>0x61254 : 0xB4A0B4A
> >>
> >># intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xa0000000
> >>Value before: 0x80000000
> >>Value after: 0xA0000000
> >># intel_reg_read 0x61254
> >>0x61254 : 0xB4A0B4A
> >>
> >># intel_reg_write 0x61250 0x90000000
> >>Value before: 0xA0000000
> >>Value after: 0x90000000
> >># intel_reg_read 0x61254
> >>0x61254 : 0xB4A0B4A
> >>
> >># intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xb0000000
> >>Value before: 0x90000000
> >>Value after: 0xB0000000
> >># intel_reg_read 0x61254
> >>0x61254 : 0xB4A0B4A
> >>
> >>Not much.
> >
> >The idea was to boot with kms and see whether any of these values would
> >restore the backlight. Writing to CTL1 should change anything in CTL2.
> Ah, sorry, ok. Removed the quirk again and tested the various settings:
> 
> -> Initial screen: dark
> 
> # intel_reg_write 0x61250 0x80000000
> Value before: 0xE0000000
> Value after: 0x80000000
> -> Still dark
> 
> # intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xa0000000
> Value before: 0x80000000
> Value after: 0xA0000000
> -> Still dark
> 
> # intel_reg_write 0x61250 0x90000000
> Value before: 0xA0000000
> Value after: 0x90000000
> -> BACKLIGHT ON!
> 
> # intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xb0000000
> Value before: 0x90000000
> Value after: 0xB0000000
> -> Still ON.

Neat. Let's test two more:

# intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xd0000000
# intel_reg_write 0x61250 0xc0000000

-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48