Re: [PATCH resend 13/15] drm/i915/dsi: Execute MIPI_SEQ_TEAR_OFF from intel_dsi_post_disable

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 24-02-17 18:02, Bob Paauwe wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 15:08:43 +0100
> Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> For v3 VBTs we should call MIPI_SEQ_TEAR_OFF before
>> MIPI_SEQ_DISPLAY_OFF, for non v3 VBTs this is a nop.
>
> Isn't this only for command mode?  Or is there conflicting information
> on this?

In my (limited) set of test hardware vidmode panel VBTs simply
do not define a MIPI_SEQ_TEAR_ON/OFF sequence. But it would probably
be a good idea to guard this with a "if (is_cmd_mode(intel_dsi))"
assuming we only want this for commandmode, which I think we do,
but it would be good to have this confirmed.

I'll add the guard when I send out a v2 after we've clarified
some of the other review questions.

Regards,

Hans



>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c
>> index 1914311..90263d6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c
>> @@ -772,6 +772,7 @@ static void intel_dsi_post_disable(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
>>  	 * XXX spec specifies SHUTDOWN before MIPI_SEQ_DISPLAY_OFF for
>>  	 * v3 VBTs, but not for v2 VBTs?
>>  	 */
>> +	intel_dsi_exec_vbt_sequence(intel_dsi, MIPI_SEQ_TEAR_OFF);
>>  	intel_dsi_exec_vbt_sequence(intel_dsi, MIPI_SEQ_DISPLAY_OFF);
>>
>>  	/* Transition to LP-00 */
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx