Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: "20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com"
	<20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com>
Cc: "Chiou, Cooper" <cooper.chiou@intel.com>,
	"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Tseng, William" <william.tseng@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:51:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YCQPLmUTGxjXFybM@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR11MB4307E25E1688D66A7B6028BBA38F9@BY5PR11MB4307.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 01:31:57PM +0000, Lee, Shawn C wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2021, at 8:26 p.m, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 11:02:28PM +0800, Lee Shawn C wrote:
> >> According to Bspec #20124, max link rate table for DP was updated at 
> >> BDB version 230. Max link rate can support upto UHBR.
> >> 
> >> After migrate to BDB v230, the definition for LBR, HBR2 and HBR3 were 
> >> changed. For backward compatibility. If BDB version was from 216 to 
> >> 229. Driver have to follow original rule to configure DP max link rate 
> >> value from VBT.
> >> 
> >> Cc: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> >> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Cooper Chiou <cooper.chiou@intel.com>
> >> Cc: William Tseng <william.tseng@intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Lee Shawn C <shawn.c.lee@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c     | 24 ++++++++++++++++++-
> >>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h | 14 +++++++----
> >>  2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c 
> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c
> >> index 04337ac6f8c4..be1f732e6550 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c
> >> @@ -1876,7 +1876,15 @@ static void parse_ddi_port(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >>  	/* DP max link rate for CNL+ */
> >>  	if (bdb_version >= 216) {
> >>  		switch (child->dp_max_link_rate) {
> >> -		default:
> >> +		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR20:
> >> +			info->dp_max_link_rate = 2000000;
> >> +			break;
> >> +		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR13P5:
> >> +			info->dp_max_link_rate = 1350000;
> >> +			break;
> >> +		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR10:
> >> +			info->dp_max_link_rate = 1000000;
> >> +			break;
> >>  		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_HBR3:
> >>  			info->dp_max_link_rate = 810000;
> >>  			break;
> >> @@ -1889,7 +1897,21 @@ static void parse_ddi_port(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >>  		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_LBR:
> >>  			info->dp_max_link_rate = 162000;
> >>  			break;
> >> +		case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_DEFAULT:
> >> +		default:
> >> +			info->dp_max_link_rate = 0;
> >> +			break;
> >> +		}
> >> +
> >> +		if (bdb_version < 230) {
> >> +			if (child->dp_max_link_rate == VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_DEFAULT)
> >> +				info->dp_max_link_rate = 810000;
> >> +			else if (child->dp_max_link_rate == VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_LBR)
> >> +				info->dp_max_link_rate = 540000;
> >> +			else if (child->dp_max_link_rate == VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_HBR2)
> >> +				info->dp_max_link_rate = 162000;
> >>  		}
> >
> >I would split this into two separate functions, one does the new mapping, the other the old mapping. 
> >
> 
> I will split this into two separate functions in patch v2.

Actually looking through the VBT history this seems to have been
retroactively changed for already rev 216+ to follow the new
definitions. And naturally no actual explanation given. So it's
the same old VBT==snafu as always.

I guess the real question is whether any machines migth have shipped
that depened on the old defitions? Unless someone manages to
find that out I think we might just have to change this to follow
only the new style and hope we don't regress a lot of machines.

I was a bit hopeful that this might have fixed [1], but looks
like that just has this set to 0 which doesn't give us the desired
2.7Gbps with either the old or new definition :(

[1] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3034

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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-10 16:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-01 15:02 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table Lee Shawn C
2021-02-01 18:31 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2021-02-01 23:51 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2021-02-05 20:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Ville Syrjälä
2021-02-08 13:31   ` Lee, Shawn C
2021-02-10 16:51     ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2021-02-11  5:22       ` Lee, Shawn C
2021-02-12 16:31         ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-02-17  6:55 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] " Lee Shawn C
2021-02-17 13:22   ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-02-17 15:38     ` Lee, Shawn C
2021-02-17  8:07 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table (rev2) Patchwork
2021-02-17  9:33 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2021-02-17 15:39 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table Lee Shawn C
2021-02-17 15:45   ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-02-18 12:01     ` Lee, Shawn C
2021-02-17 15:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table (rev3) Patchwork
2021-02-17 16:10 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-02-17 18:46 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2021-02-18  5:23 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4] drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table Lee Shawn C
2021-02-20 10:23   ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-02-18  6:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table (rev4) Patchwork
2021-02-18  7:09 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-02-18  9:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-02-18 11:29 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table (rev6) Patchwork
2021-02-18 11:59 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-02-18 13:44 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

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=YCQPLmUTGxjXFybM@intel.com \
    --to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com \
    --cc=cooper.chiou@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=william.tseng@intel.com \
    /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