[Intel-gfx] Fixing the hotplug storm bugs once and for all?

Andrew Lutomirski luto at mit.edu
Mon Jul 26 20:06:52 CEST 2010

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 15:29:25 -0400, Andrew Lutomirski <luto at mit.edu> wrote:
>> For well over a year now, I (and apparently lots of other people) have
>> had to run patched kernels to avoid crippling hotplug storms.
>> As far as I can tell, on my laptop, enabling DPC_HOTPLUG_INT_EN is
>> safe, but setting either DPB_... or DPD_... (or both) will cause
>> intermittent hotplug interrupt storms.  (Turning off all three DP
>> hotplug bits also makes the laptop stable but prevents the DP port
>> from working.)
>> My laptop is a Lenovo X200s with VGA and LVDS on the laptop itself and
>> DP on the docking port.  If I boot w/o the docking port, I have:
>> General definitions block:
>>         CRT DDC GMBUS addr: 0x02
>>         Use ACPI DPMS CRT power states: no
>>         Skip CRT detect at boot: no
>>         Use DPMS on AIM devices: yes
>>         Boot display type: 0x0000
>>         TV data block present: yes
>>         Child device info:
>>                 Device type: 1009 (TV)
>>                 Signature:
>>                 AIM offset: 0
>>                 DVO port: 0x05
>>         Child device info:
>>                 Device type: 1022 (LFP)
>>                 Signature:
>>                 AIM offset: 52048
>>                 DVO port: 0x04
>>         Child device info:
>>                 Device type: 68c6 (DisplayPort)
>>                 Signature:
>>                 AIM offset: 61152
>>                 DVO port: 0x08
>> Maybe it's time we started reading that part of VBIOS to detect which
>> outputs really exist.  (If that's unsafe, we could add a DMI list.)
>> Any thoughts?  It would be nice if 2.6.36 could work without patches.
> We had patches to not probe outputs unless they were in child dev tables
> for a while.  The issue with reading child dev tables is that some
> BIOSes would give you different child dev results depending on whether
> you were docked or not, so you wouldn't get your DP probed unless you
> booted docked.

Do you have a link?  I can try to resurrect them.

(Can Xorg handle new outputs appearing and disappearing at runtime?
If not, we could just pretend to create all possible outputs up


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list