From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: "Lisovskiy, Stanislav" <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix regression leading to display audio probe failure on GLK
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 15:17:08 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200902121708.GQ6112@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200902121201.GA26007@intel.com>
On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 01:31:09PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 06:10:36PM +0300, Kai Vehmanen wrote:
> > > In commit 4f0b4352bd26 ("drm/i915: Extract cdclk requirements checking
> > > to separate function") the order of force_min_cdclk_changed check and
> > > intel_modeset_checks(), was reversed. This broke the mechanism to
> > > immediately force a new CDCLK minimum, and lead to driver probe
> > > errors for display audio on GLK platform with 5.9-rc1 kernel. Fix
> > > the issue by moving intel_modeset_checks() call later.
> >
> > Yep. I eyeed this same code recently and noticed the same bug.
> > The one thing I didn't yet figure out is whether there is some
> > subtle ordering requirement that was the reason for the change.
> > But considering intel_modeset_checks() doesn't really do much
> > anymore I think it should be safe.
> >
> > Sadly CI has been lumping all underrun errors under some ancient
> > bugs, so no one noticed that things started to fail when this
> > regression was introduced :(
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> What surprises me here, is that the actual patch has been sent
> and merged during late spring I think and we figure out that there was
> a regression only by now.
> For example I figured out this only today. When I was doing that change,
> was actually aware that the change is actually quite significant as
> it changes the way how we deal with CDCLK, however those were necessary
> as we had a massive FIFO underrun issues at the moment. However CI didn't
> show any problems, so we went ahead with this.
I spotted some CI logs that show underruns due to this regression,
but the results just got lumped in with other older underrun bugs,
and thus CI results were always "success" :/
I think we need to kill off all underrun related CI filters and
start from scratch. Otherwise new bugs will keep slipping through.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Fixes: 4f0b4352bd26 ("drm/i915: Extract cdclk requirements checking to separate function)"
> > > BugLink: https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/issues/2410
> > > Signed-off-by: Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > index 7d50b7177d40..8caeed23037c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> > > @@ -15009,12 +15009,6 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > if (dev_priv->wm.distrust_bios_wm)
> > > any_ms = true;
> > >
> > > - if (any_ms) {
> > > - ret = intel_modeset_checks(state);
> > > - if (ret)
> > > - goto fail;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > intel_fbc_choose_crtc(dev_priv, state);
> > > ret = calc_watermark_data(state);
> > > if (ret)
> > > @@ -15029,6 +15023,10 @@ static int intel_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > goto fail;
> > >
> > > if (any_ms) {
> > > + ret = intel_modeset_checks(state);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + goto fail;
> > > +
> > > ret = intel_modeset_calc_cdclk(state);
> > > if (ret)
> > > return ret;
> > > --
> > > 2.27.0
> >
> > --
> > Ville Syrjälä
> > Intel
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-02 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-01 15:10 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix regression leading to display audio probe failure on GLK Kai Vehmanen
2020-09-01 15:49 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2020-09-02 10:31 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Ville Syrjälä
2020-09-02 12:12 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-09-02 12:17 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2020-09-02 12:34 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-09-02 12:48 ` Ville Syrjälä
2020-09-02 12:37 ` Lisovskiy, Stanislav
2020-09-02 16:57 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for " Patchwork
2020-09-03 13:47 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Ville Syrjälä
2020-09-03 14:55 ` Kai Vehmanen
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=20200902121708.GQ6112@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=stanislav.lisovskiy@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