[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/edp: Only use alternate fixed mode when requested

[Clint Taylor]

On 04/30/2018 12:49 AM, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2018, "Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com> wrote:
>>> On Apr 12, 2018, at 2:21 PM, Taylor, Clinton A <clinton.a.taylor at intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 04/11/2018 04:11 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>>> Quoting clinton.a.taylor at intel.com (2018-04-12 00:13:26)
>>>>> From: Clint Taylor <clinton.a.taylor at intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> In commit dc911f5bd8aa ("drm/i915/edp: Allow alternate fixed mode for eDP
>>>>> if available."), the patch was always selecting the alternate refresh rate
>>>>> even though user space was asking for the higher rate. This patch adds a
>>>>> check for vrefresh rate as well as the rest of the mode geometry.
>>>>>
>>>>> V2: use clock instead of vrefresh for compare.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: dc911f5bd8aac ("Allow alternate fixed mode for eDP if available.")
>>>>> Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall at linux.intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Clint Taylor <clinton.a.taylor at intel.com>
>>>> Still leaves the other discussion point in the other thread unresolved.
>>>> The fields are supplied by the user and can be arbitrary, so if they
>>>> request a clock for a 30Hz mode, instead of using the 40Hz alternative,
>>>> we use the 60Hz normal mode (by way of example). Is equality always the
>>>> best choice here?
>>> This feature is for testing PSR panels that don't support single frame setup times in their preferred timing. The down-clocked mode is the timing that the panel specifically states is supported. If a customer specifies a custom mode either it should be rejected or the eDP fixed mode (preferred) should be used. If we want to allow the users to set a custom timing to their eDP panels then we should get rid of the fixed mode feature for eDP panels.
>> But that was the goal of dc911f5bd8aac because
>> most of the panels we had here by that time with PSR had that short vblank periods for higher mode...
>> So the idea was to remove the fixed mode allowing the alternate one with lower rate and consequently higher vblank period.
>>
>> But the idea was never to respect the arbitrary user request. All panels we were targeting here had both modes listed as supported... one with 60Hz and one with 48 Hz. Both same resolution.
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105469
>
> Either we finally get a fix in with Cc: stable, or we revert
> dc911f5bd8aa ("drm/i915/edp: Allow alternate fixed mode for eDP if
> available.")

I have V3 of the patch in flight now. Though I have no problem with the 
revert as well.

-Clint


>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>
>
>>> -Clint
>>>
>>>> -Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx