[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dp: Validate cached link rate and lane count before retraining

[Manasi Navare]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 08:21:21PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:53:36AM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 06:26:06PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 04:11:32PM -0700, Manasi Navare wrote:
> > > >> Currently intel_dp_check_link_status() tries to retrain the link if
> > > >> Clock recovery or Channel EQ for any of the lanes indicated by
> > > >> intel_dp->lane_count is not set. However these values cached in intel_dp
> > > >> structure can be stale if link training has failed for these values
> > > >> during previous modeset. Or these values can get stale since we have
> > > >> now re read the DPCD registers or it can be 0 in case of connected boot
> > > >> case.
> > > >> 
> > > >> This patch validates these values against the common_rates and max lane
> > > >> count values.
> > > >> 
> > > >> This is absolutely required incase the common_rates or max lane count
> > > >> are now different due to link fallback.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Cc: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > >> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare at intel.com>
> > > >> ---
> > > >>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > >>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >> 
> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > >> index fd96a6c..51fa6b5 100644
> > > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > > >> @@ -295,6 +295,23 @@ static int intel_dp_link_rate_index(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> > > >>  	return -1;
> > > >>  }
> > > >>  
> > > >> +static bool intel_dp_link_params_is_valid(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> > > >> +{
> > > >> +	int common_rates[DP_MAX_SUPPORTED_RATES];
> > > >> +	int link_rate_index;
> > > >> +
> > > >> +	link_rate_index = intel_dp_link_rate_index(intel_dp,
> > > >> +						   common_rates,
> > > >> +						   intel_dp->link_rate);
> > > >
> > > > Hmm. I thought we started to store the common rates somewhere more
> > > > permanent, or did I imagine that?
> > > 
> > > That series got stalled waiting for Manasi's stuff to land... which
> > > means it's now conflicting and pending rebase, and still waiting. :(
> > > 
> > > J.
> > >
> > 
> > Hmm, yes but if you want I can work on rebasing it after these two patches
> > land. That series is really required.
> > 
> >  
> > > 
> > > >
> > > >> +	if (link_rate_index < 0)
> > > >> +		return false;
> > > >> +	if (!intel_dp->lane_count ||
> > > >> +	    (intel_dp->lane_count > intel_dp_max_lane_count(intel_dp)))
> > > >
> > > > Needless parens.
> > > >
> > 
> > Ok, will remove that.
> > 
> > 
> > > >> +		return false;
> > > >> +
> > > >> +	return true;
> > > >> +}
> > > >> +
> > > >>  int intel_dp_get_link_train_fallback_values(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> > > >>  					    int link_rate, uint8_t lane_count)
> > > >>  {
> > > >> @@ -4224,9 +4241,10 @@ intel_dp_check_link_status(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> > > >>  	if (!to_intel_crtc(intel_encoder->base.crtc)->active)
> > > >>  		return;
> > > >>  
> > > >> -	/* FIXME: we need to synchronize this sort of stuff with hardware
> > > >> -	 * readout. Currently fast link training doesn't work on boot-up. */
> > > >
> > > > You shouldn't remove the FIXME. It's still totally valid.
> > > >
> > 
> > But that check is now incorporated in validating the params. 
> > So why is separate check required?
> > Or are you just saying leave the FIXME comment?
> 
> Yes, leave the comment. Or better yet, move into
> intel_dp_link_params_is_valid() and maybe reword a bit to something
> like:
> 
> "FIXME: we need to synchronize the current link parameters with hardware
> readout ..."
> 
> to make it it clear that it's actually referring to the current link
> params and not something else.
> 
> 

Ok, I will move the comment into the function.
And submit a new revision. Everything else looks good?

Regards
Manasi

> > 
> > Manasi
> > 
> > 
> > > >> -	if (!intel_dp->lane_count)
> > > >> +	/* Validate the cached values of intel_dp->link_rate and
> > > >> +	 * intel_dp->lane_count before attempting to retrain.
> > > >> +	 */
> > > >> +	if (!intel_dp_link_params_is_valid(intel_dp))
> > > >>  		return;
> > > >>  
> > > >>  	/* Retrain if Channel EQ or CR not ok */
> > > >> -- 
> > > >> 2.1.4
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
> 
> -- 
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC