Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/BXT: Tolerance at BXT DSI pipe_config comparison

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

On Friday 15 April 2016 04:27 PM, Ramalingam C wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 13 April 2016 08:16 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 06:34:25PM +0530, Ramalingam C wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 13 April 2016 05:27 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Jani Nikula 
>>>>> <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Then fix adjusted_mode to have the timings in terms of txbyteclkhs
>>>>>>> already. Problem solved.
>>>>>> I let Ville convince me there would be problems with that. Ville, 
>>>>>> care
>>>>>> to fill in the details?
>>>>> If we change them too hard the accurate vblank timestamp stuff 
>>>>> will be
>>>>> upset. But then we only need to adjust horizontal timings for dsi,
>>>>> whereas on gen5+ the vblank ts code uses the line counter (i.e.
>>>>> vertical timings) only.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it's just that it should work, and I don't think we have any other
>>>>> users of the adjusted_mode.
>>>> Ok, I was wrong and we obviously need the right dotclock to compute
>>>> linedur_ns correctly in drm_calc_timestamping_constants(). So either
>>>> we adjust the dotclock of adjusted_mode too (imo makes most sense), or
>>>> we need yet another mode somewhere and use that for dsi cross checking
>>>> (real ugly imo). More I missed?
>>> Another point to be considered:
>>> And we program hsync, hfp and hbp in terms of txbyteclkhs to port 
>>> register,
>>> which are not part of adjusted_mode.
>>> So for BXT DSI, we have to store them interms of txbyteclkhs and 
>>> compare
>>> with hsync, hfp and hbp read from HW??
>> Yeah that's my idea. Plus we should probably store txbyteclkhs 
>> somewhere,
>> too. Or at least we need to adjust the clock in adjusted_mode to match
>> txbyteclkhs, otherwise the vblank ts code goes off the rails.
> Ok. I will post a RFC for this. But for that we need to finalize few 
> points.
>
> 1. We need to add three more variables in pipe_config for caching(SW 
> and HW State) the hfp, hsync and hbp.
> 2. On BXT DSI, We will compare the hdisplay, hfp, hsync and hbp only 
> on pipe_config_compare not all horizontal timing param of adjusted mode.
> 3. So we dont need to recalculate all horizontal timing parameters of 
> adjusted_mode from port register at get_config(). Should we fill them 
> too (No harm Though)?
>
> Please clarify if we are fine with above points.
Hi,

Based on the IRC discussion, we decided to nullify the round_up error in 
the dsi_get_config() itself. I have taken the AR. And the RFC is 
submitted for review at
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2016-April/092946.html
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2016-April/092947.html

Please review the same. Thanks

--Ram

>
> -Ram
>> -Daniel
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx