[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Cleaning up intel_dp_hpd_pulse

[Shubhangi Shrivastava]

On Monday 16 November 2015 08:03 PM, Ander Conselvan De Oliveira wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 17:58 +0530, Shubhangi Shrivastava wrote:
>> Current DP detection has DPCD operations split across
>> intel_dp_hpd_pulse and intel_dp_detect which contains
>> duplicates as well. Also intel_dp_detect is called
>> during modes enumeration as well which will result
>> in multiple dpcd operations. So this patch tries
>> to solve both these by bringing all DPCD operations
>> in one single function and make intel_dp_detect
>> use existing values instead of repeating same steps.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Shubhangi Shrivastava <shubhangi.shrivastava at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 19 ++++---------------
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> index a0fe827..4e74cd6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -4881,7 +4881,8 @@ intel_dp_detect(struct drm_connector *connector, bool
>> force)
>>   		return connector_status_disconnected;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
>> +	if (force)
>> +		intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
>>   
>>   	if (intel_connector->detect_edid)
>>   		return connector_status_connected;
>> @@ -5211,21 +5212,9 @@ intel_dp_hpd_pulse(struct intel_digital_port
>> *intel_dig_port, bool long_hpd)
>>   		/* indicate that we need to restart link training */
>>   		intel_dp->train_set_valid = false;
>>   
>> -		if (!intel_digital_port_connected(dev_priv, intel_dig_port))
>> -			goto mst_fail;
>> +		intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
>> +		goto put_power;
>>   
>> -		if (!intel_dp_get_dpcd(intel_dp)) {
>> -			goto mst_fail;
>> -		}
> So we don't call this for eDP anymore on long pulse, which I assume is harmless
> since the bits we are reading from DPCD shouldn't change?
>
>> -
>> -		intel_dp_probe_oui(intel_dp);
>> -
>> -		if (!intel_dp_probe_mst(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);
>> -			goto mst_fail;
>> -		}
> Hmm, so this is where that hunk from patch 1 I said should be a separate patch
> comes from. Looks like in belongs to this patch.
Pulled in that hunk from patch 1 to this patch.
>
>>   	} else {
>>   		if (intel_dp->is_mst) {
>>   			if (intel_dp_check_mst_status(intel_dp) == -EINVAL)