[PATCH 1/4] drm/i915: Add support for DP link training compliance
Jani Nikula
jani.nikula at linux.intel.com
Thu Jan 19 15:51:38 UTC 2017
On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare at intel.com> wrote:
> This patch adds support to handle automated DP compliance
> link training test requests. This patch has been tested with
> Unigraf DPR-120 DP Compliance device for testing Link
> Training Compliance.
> After we get a short pulse Compliance test request, test
> request values are read and hotplug uevent is sent in order
> to trigger another modeset during which the pipe is configured
> and link is retrained and enabled for link parameters requested
> by the test.
>
> v2:
> * Validate the test lane count before using it in
> intel_dp_compute_config (Jani Nikula)
> Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare at intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com>
> Cc: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> index e80d620..7a1d3c4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> @@ -1613,6 +1613,7 @@ static int intel_dp_compute_bpp(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> /* Conveniently, the link BW constants become indices with a shift...*/
> int min_clock = 0;
> int max_clock;
> + int link_rate_index;
> int bpp, mode_rate;
> int link_avail, link_clock;
> int common_rates[DP_MAX_SUPPORTED_RATES] = {};
> @@ -1654,6 +1655,17 @@ static int intel_dp_compute_bpp(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> if (adjusted_mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_DBLCLK)
> return false;
>
> + /* Use values requested by Compliance Test Request */
> + if (intel_dp->compliance.test_type == DP_TEST_LINK_TRAINING) {
> + link_rate_index = intel_dp_link_rate_index(intel_dp,
> + common_rates,
> + drm_dp_bw_code_to_link_rate(intel_dp->compliance.test_link_rate));
> + if (link_rate_index >= 0)
> + min_clock = max_clock = link_rate_index;
> + if (min_lane_count <= intel_dp->compliance.test_lane_count
> + && intel_dp->compliance.test_lane_count >= max_lane_count)
> + min_lane_count = max_lane_count = intel_dp->compliance.test_lane_count;
> + }
Why don't we do these checks and conversions when we get the test
request, so we can NAK the request on errors?
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("DP link computation with max lane count %i "
> "max bw %d pixel clock %iKHz\n",
> max_lane_count, common_rates[max_clock],
> @@ -3921,6 +3933,27 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
> static uint8_t intel_dp_autotest_link_training(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> uint8_t test_result = DP_TEST_ACK;
> + int status = 0;
> + /* (DP CTS 1.2)
> + * 4.3.1.11
> + */
> + /* Read the TEST_LANE_COUNT and TEST_LINK_RTAE fields (DP CTS 3.1.4) */
> + status = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&intel_dp->aux, DP_TEST_LANE_COUNT,
> + &intel_dp->compliance.test_lane_count);
> +
> + if (status <= 0) {
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Lane count read failed\n");
> + return 0;
return DP_TEST_NAK;
> + }
> + intel_dp->compliance.test_lane_count &= DP_MAX_LANE_COUNT_MASK;
> +
> + status = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&intel_dp->aux, DP_TEST_LINK_RATE,
> + &intel_dp->compliance.test_link_rate);
> + if (status <= 0) {
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Link Rate read failed\n");
> + return 0;
return DP_TEST_NAK;
> + }
> +
> return test_result;
Could replace this with a direct return DP_TEST_ACK without the temp
variable.
> }
>
> @@ -4135,9 +4168,8 @@ static void intel_dp_handle_test_request(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> if (!intel_dp->lane_count)
> return;
>
> - /* if link training is requested we should perform it always */
> - if ((intel_dp->compliance.test_type == DP_TEST_LINK_TRAINING) ||
> - (!drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(link_status, intel_dp->lane_count))) {
> + /* Retrain if Channel EQ or CR not ok */
> + if (!drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(link_status, intel_dp->lane_count)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("%s: channel EQ not ok, retraining\n",
> intel_encoder->base.name);
>
> @@ -4162,6 +4194,7 @@ static void intel_dp_handle_test_request(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> intel_dp_short_pulse(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
> + struct intel_encoder *intel_encoder = &dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp)->base;
> u8 sink_irq_vector = 0;
> u8 old_sink_count = intel_dp->sink_count;
> bool ret;
> @@ -4195,7 +4228,7 @@ static void intel_dp_handle_test_request(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> sink_irq_vector);
>
> if (sink_irq_vector & DP_AUTOMATED_TEST_REQUEST)
> - DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Test request in short pulse not handled\n");
> + intel_dp_handle_test_request(intel_dp);
> if (sink_irq_vector & (DP_CP_IRQ | DP_SINK_SPECIFIC_IRQ))
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("CP or sink specific irq unhandled\n");
> }
> @@ -4203,6 +4236,11 @@ static void intel_dp_handle_test_request(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL);
> intel_dp_check_link_status(intel_dp);
> drm_modeset_unlock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex);
> + if (intel_dp->compliance.test_type == DP_TEST_LINK_TRAINING) {
> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Link Training Compliance Test requested\n");
> + /* Send a Hotplug Uevent to userspace to start modeset */
> + drm_kms_helper_hotplug_event(intel_encoder->base.dev);
> + }
>
> return true;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> index 84258df..7a2eb76 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
> @@ -893,6 +893,8 @@ struct intel_dp_compliance {
> unsigned long test_type;
> struct intel_dp_compliance_data test_data;
> bool test_active;
> + u8 test_link_rate;
> + u8 test_lane_count;
> };
>
> struct intel_dp {
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list