From: "Thulasimani, Sivakumar" <sivakumar.thulasimani@intel.com>
To: Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
<ander.conselvan.de.oliveira@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/15] drm/i915: Don't pass *DP around to link training functions
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:15:29 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56247569.7000203@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1444028487-6501-3-git-send-email-ander.conselvan.de.oliveira@intel.com>
On 10/5/2015 12:31 PM, Ander Conselvan de Oliveira wrote:
> It just makes the code more confusing, so just reference intel_dp_>DP
> directly. The old behavior of not updating the value in intel_dp if link
> training fail is preserved by saving the previous value of DP in the
> stack and restoring the old value in case of failure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ander Conselvan de Oliveira <ander.conselvan.de.oliveira@intel.com>
> --
>
> I'm not sure the old behavior is correct, but to err in the side of
> caution I tried not to change it.
>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> index c420edf..391a367 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> @@ -3601,7 +3601,6 @@ intel_dp_set_signal_levels(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, uint32_t *DP)
>
> static bool
> intel_dp_set_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> - uint32_t *DP,
> uint8_t dp_train_pat)
> {
> struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
> @@ -3610,9 +3609,9 @@ intel_dp_set_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> uint8_t buf[sizeof(intel_dp->train_set) + 1];
> int ret, len;
>
> - _intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, DP, dp_train_pat);
> + _intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, &intel_dp->DP, dp_train_pat);
>
> - I915_WRITE(intel_dp->output_reg, *DP);
> + I915_WRITE(intel_dp->output_reg, intel_dp->DP);
> POSTING_READ(intel_dp->output_reg);
>
> buf[0] = dp_train_pat;
> @@ -3633,17 +3632,17 @@ intel_dp_set_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> }
>
> static bool
> -intel_dp_reset_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, uint32_t *DP,
> +intel_dp_reset_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> uint8_t dp_train_pat)
> {
> if (!intel_dp->train_set_valid)
> memset(intel_dp->train_set, 0, sizeof(intel_dp->train_set));
> - intel_dp_set_signal_levels(intel_dp, DP);
> - return intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, DP, dp_train_pat);
> + intel_dp_set_signal_levels(intel_dp, &intel_dp->DP);
> + return intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, dp_train_pat);
> }
>
> static bool
> -intel_dp_update_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, uint32_t *DP,
> +intel_dp_update_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> const uint8_t link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE])
> {
> struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
> @@ -3652,9 +3651,9 @@ intel_dp_update_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, uint32_t *DP,
> int ret;
>
> intel_get_adjust_train(intel_dp, link_status);
> - intel_dp_set_signal_levels(intel_dp, DP);
> + intel_dp_set_signal_levels(intel_dp, &intel_dp->DP);
>
> - I915_WRITE(intel_dp->output_reg, *DP);
> + I915_WRITE(intel_dp->output_reg, intel_dp->DP);
> POSTING_READ(intel_dp->output_reg);
>
> ret = drm_dp_dpcd_write(&intel_dp->aux, DP_TRAINING_LANE0_SET,
> @@ -3695,7 +3694,7 @@ static void intel_dp_set_idle_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> }
>
> /* Enable corresponding port and start training pattern 1 */
> -static void
> +static bool
> intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> struct drm_encoder *encoder = &dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp)->base.base;
> @@ -3703,9 +3702,9 @@ intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> int i;
> uint8_t voltage;
> int voltage_tries, loop_tries;
> - uint32_t DP = intel_dp->DP;
> uint8_t link_config[2];
> uint8_t link_bw, rate_select;
> + uint8_t link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE];
>
> if (HAS_DDI(dev))
> intel_ddi_prepare_link_retrain(encoder);
> @@ -3727,22 +3726,20 @@ intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> link_config[1] = DP_SET_ANSI_8B10B;
> drm_dp_dpcd_write(&intel_dp->aux, DP_DOWNSPREAD_CTRL, link_config, 2);
>
> - DP |= DP_PORT_EN;
> + intel_dp->DP |= DP_PORT_EN;
>
> /* clock recovery */
> - if (!intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + if (!intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp,
> DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_1 |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to enable link training\n");
> - return;
> + return false;
> }
>
> voltage = 0xff;
> voltage_tries = 0;
> loop_tries = 0;
> for (;;) {
> - uint8_t link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE];
> -
> drm_dp_link_train_clock_recovery_delay(intel_dp->dpcd);
> if (!intel_dp_get_link_status(intel_dp, link_status)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to get link status\n");
> @@ -3762,11 +3759,11 @@ intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("clock recovery not ok, reset");
> /* clear the flag as we are not reusing train set */
> intel_dp->train_set_valid = false;
> - if (!intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + if (!intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp,
> DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_1 |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to enable link training\n");
> - return;
> + return false;
> }
> continue;
> }
> @@ -3781,7 +3778,7 @@ intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> DRM_ERROR("too many full retries, give up\n");
> break;
> }
> - intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + intel_dp_reset_link_train(intel_dp,
> DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_1 |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE);
> voltage_tries = 0;
> @@ -3800,23 +3797,22 @@ intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> voltage = intel_dp->train_set[0] & DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_MASK;
>
> /* Update training set as requested by target */
> - if (!intel_dp_update_link_train(intel_dp, &DP, link_status)) {
> + if (!intel_dp_update_link_train(intel_dp, link_status)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to update link training\n");
> break;
> }
> }
>
> - intel_dp->DP = DP;
> + return drm_dp_clock_recovery_ok(link_status, intel_dp->lane_count);
why are we calling the same function again? in best case this function
is called and returned true,
or worst case it was never called. so it will be simpler if we store
the return value of this function
inside the loop and return that here ?
> }
>
> -static void
> +static bool
> intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
> struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev;
> bool channel_eq = false;
> int tries, cr_tries;
> - uint32_t DP = intel_dp->DP;
> uint32_t training_pattern = DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_2;
>
> /*
> @@ -3835,11 +3831,11 @@ intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> DRM_ERROR("5.4 Gbps link rate without HBR2/TPS3 support\n");
>
> /* channel equalization */
> - if (!intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + if (!intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp,
> training_pattern |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to start channel equalization\n");
> - return;
> + return false;
> }
>
> tries = 0;
> @@ -3864,7 +3860,7 @@ intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> intel_dp->lane_count)) {
> intel_dp->train_set_valid = false;
> intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(intel_dp);
> - intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp,
> training_pattern |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE);
> cr_tries++;
> @@ -3881,7 +3877,7 @@ intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> if (tries > 5) {
> intel_dp->train_set_valid = false;
> intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(intel_dp);
> - intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, &DP,
> + intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp,
> training_pattern |
> DP_LINK_SCRAMBLING_DISABLE);
> tries = 0;
> @@ -3890,7 +3886,7 @@ intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> }
>
> /* Update training set as requested by target */
> - if (!intel_dp_update_link_train(intel_dp, &DP, link_status)) {
> + if (!intel_dp_update_link_train(intel_dp, link_status)) {
> DRM_ERROR("failed to update link training\n");
> break;
> }
> @@ -3899,25 +3895,29 @@ intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
>
> intel_dp_set_idle_link_train(intel_dp);
>
> - intel_dp->DP = DP;
> -
> if (channel_eq) {
> intel_dp->train_set_valid = true;
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Channel EQ done. DP Training successful\n");
> + return true;
> + } else {
> + return false;
> }
> }
>
> void intel_dp_stop_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> - intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp, &intel_dp->DP,
> + intel_dp_set_link_train(intel_dp,
> DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_DISABLE);
> }
>
> void
> intel_dp_start_link_train(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> - intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(intel_dp);
> - intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(intel_dp);
> + uint32_t DP = intel_dp->DP;
> +
> + if (!intel_dp_link_training_clock_recovery(intel_dp) ||
> + !intel_dp_link_training_channel_equalization(intel_dp))
> + intel_dp->DP = DP;
it is wrong to restore the value of DP here, we have modified the value
of port/ddi already inside the two functions.
if either of these two steps fail we should call stop link training and
follow it with bspec disable sequence.
so saving and restoring will not help us in anyway but more hide the
real status of HW.
> }
>
> static void
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-19 4:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-05 7:01 [PATCH 00/15] Making DP link training code more readable Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 01/15] drm/i915: Rename DP link training functions Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-06 8:54 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 02/15] drm/i915: Don't pass *DP around to " Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-19 4:45 ` Thulasimani, Sivakumar [this message]
2015-10-19 7:36 ` Conselvan De Oliveira, Ander
2015-10-19 8:56 ` Ander Conselvan De Oliveira
2015-10-19 9:01 ` Thulasimani, Sivakumar
2015-10-21 13:52 ` [PATCH v2] " Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-21 14:08 ` Thulasimani, Sivakumar
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 03/15] drm/i915: Split intel_dp_update_link_train() Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 04/15] drm/i915: Split write of pattern to DP reg from intel_dp_set_link_train Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 05/15] drm/i915: Don't call intel_dp_set_signal_levels() on link train reset Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 06/15] drm/i915: Move generic link training code to a separate file Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 07/15] drm/i915: Create intel_dp->prepare_link_retrain() hook Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 08/15] drm/i915: Make intel_dp_source_supports_hbr2() take an intel_dp pointer Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 09/15] drm/i915: Move link training setup code to separate functions Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 10/15] drm/i915: Move test for max voltage on all lanes to separate function Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 11/15] drm/i915: Add function for getting the current link training voltage Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 12/15] drm/i915: Split full retries loop out of clock recovery code Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 13/15] drm/i915: Make the link training test for same voltage Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-06 10:41 ` [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Make the link training test for same voltage smaller Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 14/15] drm/i915: Move the voltage changed check into intel_get_adjust_train() Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
2015-10-05 7:01 ` [PATCH 15/15] drm/i915: Add missing newline to link training debug message Ander Conselvan de Oliveira
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=56247569.7000203@intel.com \
--to=sivakumar.thulasimani@intel.com \
--cc=ander.conselvan.de.oliveira@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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