From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A788C433DB for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:52:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3DEF64DE1 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:52:30 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F3DEF64DE1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FDB6E1D2; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:52:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 607526E1D2 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:52:29 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: neOZX3vchV0jXT8xoEzhZ+3wJFboolYZgH65J9LeHkAZQO95t3QxDDNWDzMgPC6IK0uL9bfxB8 EuWMlxHIqn5g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9891"; a="266949604" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,168,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="266949604" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2021 08:52:02 -0800 IronPort-SDR: VHfp+dBwzTNi3pt1hpJSny6ROXhGG/e8bWsrs6s3kWE2aWjkv0tCU2fZG8z6Jb1bA9A8o53w9N B6MnojfLUCeQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,168,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="380204454" Received: from stinkbox.fi.intel.com (HELO stinkbox) ([10.237.72.171]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 10 Feb 2021 08:51:59 -0800 Received: by stinkbox (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:51:58 +0200 Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:51:58 +0200 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: "20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com" <20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com> Message-ID: References: <20210201150228.10001-1-shawn.c.lee@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Patchwork-Hint: comment Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/vbt: update DP max link rate table X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Chiou, Cooper" , "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" , "Tseng, William" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" 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 Syrj=E4l=E4 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 > >> Cc: Imre Deak > >> Cc: Jani Nikula > >> Cc: Cooper Chiou > >> Cc: William Tseng > >> Signed-off-by: Lee Shawn C > >> --- > >> 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_priv= ate *dev_priv, > >> /* DP max link rate for CNL+ */ > >> if (bdb_version >=3D 216) { > >> switch (child->dp_max_link_rate) { > >> - default: > >> + case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR20: > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 2000000; > >> + break; > >> + case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR13P5: > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 1350000; > >> + break; > >> + case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_UHBR10: > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 1000000; > >> + break; > >> case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_HBR3: > >> info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 810000; > >> break; > >> @@ -1889,7 +1897,21 @@ static void parse_ddi_port(struct drm_i915_priv= ate *dev_priv, > >> case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_LBR: > >> info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 162000; > >> break; > >> + case VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_DEFAULT: > >> + default: > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 0; > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + > >> + if (bdb_version < 230) { > >> + if (child->dp_max_link_rate =3D=3D VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_DEFAULT) > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 810000; > >> + else if (child->dp_max_link_rate =3D=3D VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_LBR) > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 540000; > >> + else if (child->dp_max_link_rate =3D=3D VBT_DP_MAX_LINK_RATE_HBR2) > >> + info->dp_max_link_rate =3D 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=3D=3Dsnafu 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 Syrj=E4l=E4 Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx