[Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Ville Syrjälä]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1850 bytes --]

Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] drm: Nuke mode->vrefresh
Message-ID: <20200226115708.GH13686@intel.com>
References: <20200219203544.31013-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
 <CGME20200219203620eucas1p24b4990a91e758dbcf3e9b943669b0c8f@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20200219203544.31013-5-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
 <0f278771-79ce-fe23-e72c-3935dbe82d24@samsung.com>
 <20200225112114.GA13686@intel.com>
 <3ca785f2-9032-aaf9-0965-8657d31116ba@samsung.com>
 <20200225154506.GF13686@intel.com>
 <20200225192720.GG13686@intel.com>
 <CACRpkdZk9QEy+Kzkmy4BXiHB+aq9hprf=dmA_-R23yqH3NCt1g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdZk9QEy+Kzkmy4BXiHB+aq9hprf=dmA_-R23yqH3NCt1g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Patchwork-Hint: comment
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 8:27 PM Ville Syrjälä
> <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > OK, so I went ahead a wrote a bit of cocci [1] to find the bad apples.
> 
> That's impressive :D
> 
> > Unfortunately it found a lot of strange stuff:
> 
> I will answer for the weirdness I caused.
> 
> I have long suspected that a whole bunch of the "simple" displays
> are not simple but contains a display controller and memory.
> That means that the speed over the link to the display and
> actual refresh rate on the actual display is asymmetric because
> well we are just updating a RAM, the resolution just limits how
> much data we are sending, the clock limits the speed on the
> bus over to the RAM on the other side.

IMO even in command mode mode->clock should probably be the actual
dotclock used by the display. If there's another clock for the bus
speed/etc. it should be stored somewhere else.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

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

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Linus Walleij]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:57 PM Ville Syrjälä
<ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:

> > I have long suspected that a whole bunch of the "simple" displays
> > are not simple but contains a display controller and memory.
> > That means that the speed over the link to the display and
> > actual refresh rate on the actual display is asymmetric because
> > well we are just updating a RAM, the resolution just limits how
> > much data we are sending, the clock limits the speed on the
> > bus over to the RAM on the other side.
>
> IMO even in command mode mode->clock should probably be the actual
> dotclock used by the display. If there's another clock for the bus
> speed/etc. it should be stored somewhere else.

Good point. For the DSI panels we have the field hs_rate
for the HS clock in struct mipi_dsi_device which is based
on exactly this reasoning. And that is what I actually use for
setting the HS clock.

The problem is however that we in many cases have so
substandard documentation of these panels that we have
absolutely no idea about the dotclock. Maybe we should
just set it to 0 in these cases?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 01:08:06PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:57 PM Ville Syrjälä
> <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 
> > > I have long suspected that a whole bunch of the "simple" displays
> > > are not simple but contains a display controller and memory.
> > > That means that the speed over the link to the display and
> > > actual refresh rate on the actual display is asymmetric because
> > > well we are just updating a RAM, the resolution just limits how
> > > much data we are sending, the clock limits the speed on the
> > > bus over to the RAM on the other side.
> >
> > IMO even in command mode mode->clock should probably be the actual
> > dotclock used by the display. If there's another clock for the bus
> > speed/etc. it should be stored somewhere else.
> 
> Good point. For the DSI panels we have the field hs_rate
> for the HS clock in struct mipi_dsi_device which is based
> on exactly this reasoning. And that is what I actually use for
> setting the HS clock.
> 
> The problem is however that we in many cases have so
> substandard documentation of these panels that we have
> absolutely no idea about the dotclock. Maybe we should
> just set it to 0 in these cases?

Don't you always have a TE interrupt or something like that
available? Could just measure it from that if no better
information is available?

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

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Linus Walleij]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:34 PM Ville Syrjälä
<ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 01:08:06PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:57 PM Ville Syrjälä
> > <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >
> > > > I have long suspected that a whole bunch of the "simple" displays
> > > > are not simple but contains a display controller and memory.
> > > > That means that the speed over the link to the display and
> > > > actual refresh rate on the actual display is asymmetric because
> > > > well we are just updating a RAM, the resolution just limits how
> > > > much data we are sending, the clock limits the speed on the
> > > > bus over to the RAM on the other side.
> > >
> > > IMO even in command mode mode->clock should probably be the actual
> > > dotclock used by the display. If there's another clock for the bus
> > > speed/etc. it should be stored somewhere else.
> >
> > Good point. For the DSI panels we have the field hs_rate
> > for the HS clock in struct mipi_dsi_device which is based
> > on exactly this reasoning. And that is what I actually use for
> > setting the HS clock.
> >
> > The problem is however that we in many cases have so
> > substandard documentation of these panels that we have
> > absolutely no idea about the dotclock. Maybe we should
> > just set it to 0 in these cases?
>
> Don't you always have a TE interrupt or something like that
> available? Could just measure it from that if no better
> information is available?

Yes and I did exactly that, so that is why this comment is in
the driver:

static const struct drm_display_mode sony_acx424akp_cmd_mode = {
(...)
        /*
         * Some desired refresh rate, experiments at the maximum "pixel"
         * clock speed (HS clock 420 MHz) yields around 117Hz.
         */
        .vrefresh = 60,

I got a review comment at the time saying 117 Hz was weird.
We didn't reach a proper conclusion on this:
https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/CACRpkdYW3YNPSNMY3A44GQn8DqK-n9TLvr7uipF7LM_DHZ5=Lg@mail.gmail.com/

Thierry wasn't sure if 60Hz was good or not, so I just had to
go with something.

We could calculate the resulting pixel clock for ~117 Hz with
this resolution and put that in the clock field but ... don't know
what is the best?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:34 PM Ville Syrjälä
> <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 01:08:06PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:57 PM Ville Syrjälä
> > > <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:52:25PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I have long suspected that a whole bunch of the "simple" displays
> > > > > are not simple but contains a display controller and memory.
> > > > > That means that the speed over the link to the display and
> > > > > actual refresh rate on the actual display is asymmetric because
> > > > > well we are just updating a RAM, the resolution just limits how
> > > > > much data we are sending, the clock limits the speed on the
> > > > > bus over to the RAM on the other side.
> > > >
> > > > IMO even in command mode mode->clock should probably be the actual
> > > > dotclock used by the display. If there's another clock for the bus
> > > > speed/etc. it should be stored somewhere else.
> > >
> > > Good point. For the DSI panels we have the field hs_rate
> > > for the HS clock in struct mipi_dsi_device which is based
> > > on exactly this reasoning. And that is what I actually use for
> > > setting the HS clock.
> > >
> > > The problem is however that we in many cases have so
> > > substandard documentation of these panels that we have
> > > absolutely no idea about the dotclock. Maybe we should
> > > just set it to 0 in these cases?
> >
> > Don't you always have a TE interrupt or something like that
> > available? Could just measure it from that if no better
> > information is available?
> 
> Yes and I did exactly that, so that is why this comment is in
> the driver:
> 
> static const struct drm_display_mode sony_acx424akp_cmd_mode = {
> (...)
>         /*
>          * Some desired refresh rate, experiments at the maximum "pixel"
>          * clock speed (HS clock 420 MHz) yields around 117Hz.
>          */
>         .vrefresh = 60,
> 
> I got a review comment at the time saying 117 Hz was weird.
> We didn't reach a proper conclusion on this:
> https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/CACRpkdYW3YNPSNMY3A44GQn8DqK-n9TLvr7uipF7LM_DHZ5=Lg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> Thierry wasn't sure if 60Hz was good or not, so I just had to
> go with something.
> 
> We could calculate the resulting pixel clock for ~117 Hz with
> this resolution and put that in the clock field but ... don't know
> what is the best?

I would vote for that approach.

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

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Matthew Auld]

On Thu, 19 May 2022 at 10:55, Christian König
<ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just sending that out once more to intel-gfx to let the CI systems take
> a look.

If all went well it should normally appear at [1][2], if CI was able
to pick up the series.

Since it's not currently there, I assume it's temporarily stuck in the
moderation queue, assuming you are not subscribed to intel-gfx ml? If
so, perhaps consider subscribing at [3] and then disable receiving any
mail from the ml, so you get full use of CI without getting spammed.

[1] https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/queue/index.html
[2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/intel-gfx/series/
[3] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

>
> No functional change compared to the last version.
>
> Christian.
>
>

[Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[Alan Previn]

Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Add PXP firmware respose on ARB failure

Add PXP firmware respose on ARB failure

Signed-off-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>

Alan Previn (1):
  drm/i915/pxp: Add firmware status when ARB session fails

 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_session.c | 1 +
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/pxp/intel_pxp_tee.c     | 2 ++
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)


base-commit: fea329811a7bc341aac5f51ab66ec41a3d0844af
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [Intel-gfx] (no subject)

[philly j]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2128 bytes --]

      
  

 Listen, here’s the problem I’m having guys and I need someone to reply back to me. Because I wrote to FSF and they wrote me right back and I join their and I have no problem with free software and complain but I don’t exactly know what you want me to do and I don’t have “git”   on my windows computer. And it seems like you guys are making it hard for me to do anything in the first place I can’t even connect to the Internet can someone help me out?
  
  
what problem am I    resolving  

  
  
  
  

  
  
>   
> On Jun 20, 2023 at 7:55 PM,  <Patchwork (mailto:patchwork@emeril.freedesktop.org)>  wrote:
>   
>   
>   
>  == Series Details == Series: drm/i915:fix kernel-doc trivial warnings URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/119620/ State : failure == Summary == Error: patch https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/119620/revisions/1/mbox/ not applied Applying: drm/i915:fix kernel-doc trivial warnings Using index info to reconstruct a base tree... M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_active.h M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scatterlist.h M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.h Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge... Auto-merging drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.h Auto-merging drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.h Auto-merging drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scatterlist.h Auto-merging drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c Auto-merging drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c error: Failed to merge in the changes. hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch Patch failed at 0001 drm/i915:fix kernel-doc trivial warnings When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue". If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead. To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort". Build failed, no error log produced  
>
>   
  
  

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2505 bytes --]