[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/eDP: When enabling panel VDD cancel pending disable worker
Ville Syrjälä
ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com
Mon Nov 24 18:44:11 CET 2014
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 07:32:49PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:56:20PM +0100, Egbert Eich wrote:
> > Before testing if the panel VDD is enabled on eDP cancel any pending
> > disable worker. This makes sure the worker doesn't fire when we expect
> > VDD to be enabled.
> >
> > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86201
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Egbert Eich <eich at suse.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > index 70bb8d0b..81f959d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > @@ -1503,6 +1503,7 @@ static bool edp_panel_vdd_on(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> > if (!is_edp(intel_dp))
> > return false;
> >
> > + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&intel_dp->panel_vdd_work);
>
> This can deadlock since we're already holding pps_mutex and
> edp_panel_vdd_work() also grabs it.
>
> I'm thinking we may want something like mod_delayed_work() instead.
Or rather just cancel_delayed_work() is enough here I guess. W/o the
_sync we shouldn't deadlock. And if we always cancel here the timer
shoduln't be pending in edp_panel_vdd_schedule_off() anymore, so
mod_delayed_work() there would anyway just be the same as
schedule_delayed_work().
>
>
> > intel_dp->want_panel_vdd = true;
> >
> > if (edp_have_panel_vdd(intel_dp))
> > --
> > 1.8.4.5
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list