Re: [PATCH 3/10] drm/i915: Enable/disable DRRS

[Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5661 bytes --]


On Friday 16 January 2015 04:16 AM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Vandana Kannan
> <vandana.kannan@intel.com> wrote:
>> Calling enable/disable DRRS when enable/disable DDI are called.
>> These functions are responsible for setup of drrs data (in enable) and
>> reset of drrs (in disable).
>> has_drrs is true when downclock_mode is found and SEAMLESS_DRRS is set in
>> the VBT. A check has been added for has_drrs in these functions, to make
>> sure the functions go through only if DRRS will work on the platform with
>> the attached panel.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vandana Kannan <vandana.kannan@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c |  2 ++
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c  | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h |  2 ++
>>   3 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
>> index 1c92ad4..c704434 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
>> @@ -1605,6 +1605,7 @@ static void intel_enable_ddi(struct intel_encoder *intel_encoder)
>>
>>                  intel_edp_backlight_on(intel_dp);
>>                  intel_psr_enable(intel_dp);
>> +               intel_edp_drrs_enable(intel_dp);
>>          }
>>
>>          if (intel_crtc->config.has_audio) {
>> @@ -1630,6 +1631,7 @@ static void intel_disable_ddi(struct intel_encoder *intel_encoder)
>>          if (type == INTEL_OUTPUT_EDP) {
>>                  struct intel_dp *intel_dp = enc_to_intel_dp(encoder);
>>
>> +               intel_edp_drrs_disable(intel_dp);
>>                  intel_psr_disable(intel_dp);
>>                  intel_edp_backlight_off(intel_dp);
>>          }
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> index 30b3aa1..5e7dc7b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -4819,6 +4819,60 @@ static void intel_dp_set_drrs_state(struct drm_device *dev, int refresh_rate)
>>          DRM_DEBUG_KMS("eDP Refresh Rate set to : %dHz\n", refresh_rate);
>>   }
>>
>> +void intel_edp_drrs_enable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
>> +{
>> +       struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
>> +       struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>> +       struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
>> +       struct drm_crtc *crtc = dig_port->base.base.crtc;
>> +       struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
>> +
>> +       if (!intel_crtc->config.has_drrs) {
>> +               DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Panel doesn't support DRRS\n");
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
>> +       if (dev_priv->drrs.dp) {
>> +               DRM_DEBUG_KMS("DRRS already enabled\n");
> Although I'm in favor of reducing WARNS I have to ask: should be a warn_on here?
Yes, Thats correct. we should give a warning message for repeated enable 
call.
>
>> +               mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
> goto unlock?
Could avoid the repeated mutex_unlock. We will go with that.
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       dev_priv->drrs.busy_frontbuffer_bits = 0;
>> +
>> +       dev_priv->drrs.dp = intel_dp;
>> +       mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void intel_edp_drrs_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
>> +{
>> +       struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
>> +       struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>> +       struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
>> +       struct drm_crtc *crtc = dig_port->base.base.crtc;
>> +       struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
>> +
>> +       if (!intel_crtc->config.has_drrs)
>> +               return;
>> +
>> +       mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
>> +       if (!dev_priv->drrs.dp) {
>> +               mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       if (dev_priv->drrs.refresh_rate_type == DRRS_LOW_RR)
>> +               intel_dp_set_drrs_state(dev_priv->dev,
>> +                       intel_dp->attached_connector->panel.
>> +                       fixed_mode->vrefresh);
>> +
>> +       dev_priv->drrs.dp = NULL;
>> +       mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex);
>> +
>> +       cancel_delayed_work_sync(&dev_priv->drrs.work);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static void intel_edp_drrs_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>   {
>>          struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> index 2ba045d..6f3ad3b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> @@ -1003,6 +1003,8 @@ int intel_update_plane(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>>                         uint32_t src_x, uint32_t src_y,
>>                         uint32_t src_w, uint32_t src_h);
>>   int intel_disable_plane(struct drm_plane *plane);
>> +void intel_edp_drrs_enable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp);
>> +void intel_edp_drrs_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp);
> This causes conflict on nightly. There is a rebased version at:
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~vivijim/drm-intel/log/?h=review-drrs
>
>>   /* intel_dp_mst.c */
>>   int intel_dp_mst_encoder_init(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port, int conn_id);
>> --
>> 2.0.1
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
> with or without bikesheds in place feel free to use:
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7083 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 159 bytes --]

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