[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Allow control of PSR at runtime through debugfs, v4.
Maarten Lankhorst
maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com
Wed Aug 8 09:00:40 UTC 2018
Op 08-08-18 om 02:07 schreef Dhinakaran Pandiyan:
> On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 15:35 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Currently tests modify i915.enable_psr and then do a modeset cycle
>> to change PSR. We can write a value to i915_edp_psr_debug to force
>> a certain PSR mode without a modeset.
>>
>> To retain compatibility with older userspace, we also still allow
>> the override through the module parameter, and add some tracking
>> to check whether a debugfs mode is specified.
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>> - Rename dev_priv->psr.enabled to .dp, and .hw_configured to
>> .enabled.
>> - Fix i915_psr_debugfs_mode to match the writes to debugfs.
>> - Rename __i915_edp_psr_write to intel_psr_set_debugfs_mode, simplify
>> it and move it to intel_psr.c. This keeps all internals in
>> intel_psr.c
>> - Perform an interruptible wait for hw completion outside of the psr
>> lock, instead of being forced to trywait and return -EBUSY.
>> Changes since v2:
>> - Rebase on top of intel_psr changes.
>> Changes since v3:
>> - Assign psr.dp during init. (dhnkrn)
>> - Add prepared bool, which should be used instead of relying on
>> psr.dp. (dhnkrn)
>> - Fix -EDEADLK handling in debugfs. (dhnkrn)
>> - Clean up waiting for idle in intel_psr_set_debugfs_mode.
>> - Print PSR mode when trying to enable PSR. (dhnkrn)
>> - Move changing psr debug setting to i915_edp_psr_debug_set. (dhnkrn)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>> Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 21 ++++-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 12 ++-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 5 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 136 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> --
>> 5 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> index 59dc0610ea44..a7e927413e8e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>> @@ -2705,7 +2705,7 @@ static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file
>> *m, void *data)
>> intel_runtime_pm_get(dev_priv);
>>
>> mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> - seq_printf(m, "Enabled: %s\n", yesno((bool)dev_priv-
>>> psr.enabled));
>> + seq_printf(m, "Enabled: %s\n", yesno(dev_priv-
>>> psr.enabled));
>> seq_printf(m, "Busy frontbuffer bits: 0x%03x\n",
>> dev_priv->psr.busy_frontbuffer_bits);
>>
>> @@ -2747,14 +2747,29 @@ static int
>> i915_edp_psr_debug_set(void *data, u64 val)
>> {
>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = data;
>> + struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx ctx;
>> + int ret;
>>
>> if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv))
>> return -ENODEV;
>>
>> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR debug %s\n", enableddisabled(val));
>> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Setting PSR debug to %llx\n", val);
>>
>> intel_runtime_pm_get(dev_priv);
>> - intel_psr_irq_control(dev_priv, !!val);
>> +
>> + drm_modeset_acquire_init(&ctx,
>> DRM_MODESET_ACQUIRE_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>> +
>> +retry:
>> + ret = intel_psr_set_debugfs_mode(dev_priv, &ctx, val);
>> + if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
>> + ret = drm_modeset_backoff(&ctx);
> Is there any reason not backoff where modeset_lock() is called, i.e.,
> inside set_debugfs_mode()?
Readability, same reason why runtime_pm_put is also kept in i915_edp_psr_debug_set.
The actual debugfs set function shouldn't have to worry about it, same as we do in atomic commits.
>> + if (!ret)
>> + goto retry;
>> + }
>> +
>> + drm_modeset_drop_locks(&ctx);
> Same with this?
>
>> + drm_modeset_acquire_fini(&ctx);
>> +
>> intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
>>
>> return 0;
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> index 0f49f9988dfa..ef04b6cd7863 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>> @@ -611,8 +611,17 @@ struct i915_drrs {
>>
>> struct i915_psr {
>> struct mutex lock;
>> +
>> +#define I915_PSR_DEBUG_IRQ BIT(0)
> nit: looks a bit odd to use the BIT macro only for the first bit. Is
> this the new guideline for single bit definitions?
I tried to preserve the old behavior, so echo 1 > debug would still enable irq debugging.
I'm all for breaking this if it makes your life easier. :)
>
>> +#define I915_PSR_DEBUG_MODE_MASK (7 << 1)
>> +#define I915_PSR_DEBUG_DEFAULT (0 << 1)
>> +#define I915_PSR_DEBUG_DISABLE (1 << 1)
>> +#define I915_PSR_DEBUG_ENABLE (2 << 1)
> Can we also please define the enable/disable bits from 0 and move the
> debug one towards MSB? The enable/disable bits will be the most
> commonly used ones and it'd be easy to remember if there was no shift?
> I'm fine if you don't want to change too.
Yeah that's fine.
>> +
>> + u32 debug;
>> bool sink_support;
>> - struct intel_dp *enabled;
>> + bool prepared, enabled;
>> + struct intel_dp *dp;
>> bool active;
>> struct work_struct work;
>> unsigned busy_frontbuffer_bits;
>> @@ -622,7 +631,6 @@ struct i915_psr {
>> bool alpm;
>> bool psr2_enabled;
>> u8 sink_sync_latency;
>> - bool debug;
>> ktime_t last_entry_attempt;
>> ktime_t last_exit;
>> };
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> index 5dadefca2ad2..defd696e71fc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>> @@ -4051,7 +4051,7 @@ static int ironlake_irq_postinstall(struct
>> drm_device *dev)
>>
>> if (IS_HASWELL(dev_priv)) {
>> gen3_assert_iir_is_zero(dev_priv, EDP_PSR_IIR);
>> - intel_psr_irq_control(dev_priv, dev_priv-
>>> psr.debug);
>> + intel_psr_irq_control(dev_priv, dev_priv->psr.debug
>> & I915_PSR_DEBUG_IRQ);
>> display_mask |= DE_EDP_PSR_INT_HSW;
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> index 99a5f5be5b82..f4cfb7ed2262 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> @@ -1930,6 +1930,9 @@ void intel_psr_enable(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>> const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
>> void intel_psr_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>> const struct intel_crtc_state
>> *old_crtc_state);
>> +int intel_psr_set_debugfs_mode(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> + struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *ctx,
>> + u64 value);
>> void intel_psr_invalidate(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> unsigned frontbuffer_bits,
>> enum fb_op_origin origin);
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
>> index 4bd5768731ee..7848829094ca 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
>> @@ -56,6 +56,18 @@
>> #include "intel_drv.h"
>> #include "i915_drv.h"
>>
>> +static bool psr_global_enabled(u32 debug)
>> +{
>> + switch (debug & I915_PSR_DEBUG_MODE_MASK) {
>> + case I915_PSR_DEBUG_DEFAULT:
>> + return i915_modparams.enable_psr;
>> + case I915_PSR_DEBUG_DISABLE:
>> + return false;
>> + default:
>> + return true;
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> void intel_psr_irq_control(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, bool
>> debug)
>> {
>> u32 debug_mask, mask;
>> @@ -80,7 +92,6 @@ void intel_psr_irq_control(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv, bool debug)
>> if (debug)
>> mask |= debug_mask;
>>
>> - WRITE_ONCE(dev_priv->psr.debug, debug);
>> I915_WRITE(EDP_PSR_IMR, ~mask);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -212,6 +223,7 @@ void intel_psr_init_dpcd(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp)
>> dev_priv->psr.sink_support = true;
>> dev_priv->psr.sink_sync_latency =
>> intel_dp_get_sink_sync_latency(intel_dp);
>> + dev_priv->psr.dp = intel_dp;
>>
>> if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 9 &&
>> (intel_dp->psr_dpcd[0] ==
>> DP_PSR2_WITH_Y_COORD_IS_SUPPORTED)) {
>> @@ -471,11 +483,6 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>> if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv))
>> return;
>>
>> - if (!i915_modparams.enable_psr) {
>> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR disable by flag\n");
>> - return;
>> - }
>> -
>> /*
>> * HSW spec explicitly says PSR is tied to port A.
>> * BDW+ platforms with DDI implementation of PSR have
>> different
>> @@ -517,7 +524,6 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>>
>> crtc_state->has_psr = true;
>> crtc_state->has_psr2 = intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
>> crtc_state);
>> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Enabling PSR%s\n", crtc_state->has_psr2 ? "2"
>> : "");
>> }
>>
>> static void intel_psr_activate(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
>> @@ -589,6 +595,23 @@ static void intel_psr_enable_source(struct
>> intel_dp *intel_dp,
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +static void intel_psr_enable_locked(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv,
>> + const struct intel_crtc_state
>> *crtc_state)
>> +{
>> + struct intel_dp *intel_dp = dev_priv->psr.dp;
>> +
>> + if (dev_priv->psr.enabled)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Enabling PSR%s\n", dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled
>> ? "2" : "1");
>> + intel_psr_setup_vsc(intel_dp, crtc_state);
>> + intel_psr_enable_sink(intel_dp);
>> + intel_psr_enable_source(intel_dp, crtc_state);
>> + dev_priv->psr.enabled = true;
>> +
>> + intel_psr_activate(intel_dp);
>> +}
>> +
>> /**
>> * intel_psr_enable - Enable PSR
>> * @intel_dp: Intel DP
>> @@ -611,20 +634,20 @@ void intel_psr_enable(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>>
>> WARN_ON(dev_priv->drrs.dp);
> We could add a new line here?
Indeed, maybe change to if (WARN_ON(intel_dp != dev_priv->drrs.dp)) return; ?
>
>> mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> - if (dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
>> + if (dev_priv->psr.prepared) {
>> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR already in use\n");
>> goto unlock;
>> }
>>
>> dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled = crtc_state->has_psr2;
>> dev_priv->psr.busy_frontbuffer_bits = 0;
>> + dev_priv->psr.prepared = true;
>> + dev_priv->psr.dp = intel_dp;
> .dp is already set in init_dpcd()
Paranoia, in case we somehow ended up with 2 eDP's due to a bug. Maybe the change above?
>>
>> - intel_psr_setup_vsc(intel_dp, crtc_state);
>> - intel_psr_enable_sink(intel_dp);
>> - intel_psr_enable_source(intel_dp, crtc_state);
>> - dev_priv->psr.enabled = intel_dp;
>> -
>> - intel_psr_activate(intel_dp);
>> + if (psr_global_enabled(dev_priv->psr.debug))
>> + intel_psr_enable_locked(dev_priv, crtc_state);
>> + else
>> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR disabled by flag\n");
>>
>> unlock:
>> mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> @@ -683,12 +706,13 @@ static void intel_psr_disable_locked(struct
>> intel_dp *intel_dp)
>> if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled)
>> return;
>>
>> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Disabling PSR\n");
> Print PSR1/2 too? Like you've done in the enable counter part.
Thought about it, might as well do so.
>
>> intel_psr_disable_source(intel_dp);
>>
>> /* Disable PSR on Sink */
>> drm_dp_dpcd_writeb(&intel_dp->aux, DP_PSR_EN_CFG, 0);
>>
>> - dev_priv->psr.enabled = NULL;
>> + dev_priv->psr.enabled = false;
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -712,7 +736,14 @@ void intel_psr_disable(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>> return;
>>
>> mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> + if (intel_dp != dev_priv->psr.dp || !dev_priv->psr.prepared)
> Won't intel_dp == dev_priv->psr.dp if old_crtc_state->has_psr was true?
In case we have 2 eDP's somehow, again.
>
>> {
>> + mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> intel_psr_disable_locked(intel_dp);
>> +
>> + dev_priv->psr.prepared = false;
>> mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> cancel_work_sync(&dev_priv->psr.work);
>> }
>> @@ -724,9 +755,6 @@ int intel_psr_wait_for_idle(const struct
>> intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>> i915_reg_t reg;
>> u32 mask;
>>
>> - if (!new_crtc_state->has_psr)
>> - return 0;
>> -
>> /*
>> * The sole user right now is intel_pipe_update_start(),
>> * which won't race with psr_enable/disable, which is
>> @@ -737,6 +765,9 @@ int intel_psr_wait_for_idle(const struct
>> intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>> * not needed and will induce latencies in the atomic
>> * update path.
>> */
>> + if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled) {
>> reg = EDP_PSR2_STATUS;
>> mask = EDP_PSR2_STATUS_STATE_MASK;
>> @@ -756,13 +787,11 @@ int intel_psr_wait_for_idle(const struct
>> intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>>
>> static bool __psr_wait_for_idle_locked(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv)
>> {
>> - struct intel_dp *intel_dp;
>> i915_reg_t reg;
>> u32 mask;
>> int err;
>>
>> - intel_dp = dev_priv->psr.enabled;
>> - if (!intel_dp)
>> + if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled)
>> return false;
>>
>> if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled) {
>> @@ -784,6 +813,62 @@ static bool __psr_wait_for_idle_locked(struct
>> drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> return err == 0 && dev_priv->psr.enabled;
>> }
>>
>> +int intel_psr_set_debugfs_mode(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>> + struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *ctx,
>> + u64 val)
>> +{
>> + struct drm_device *dev = &dev_priv->drm;
>> + struct drm_connector_state *conn_state;
>> + struct drm_crtc *crtc;
>> + struct intel_dp *dp;
>> + int ret;
>> + bool enable;
>> +
>> + if (val & ~(I915_PSR_DEBUG_IRQ | I915_PSR_DEBUG_MODE_MASK)
>> ||
>> + (val & I915_PSR_DEBUG_MODE_MASK) >
>> I915_PSR_DEBUG_ENABLE) {
>> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Invalid debug mask %llx\n", val);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex,
>> ctx);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + /* dev_priv->psr.dp should be set once and then never
>> touched again. */
>> + dp = READ_ONCE(dev_priv->psr.dp);
>> + conn_state = dp->attached_connector->base.state;
>> + crtc = conn_state->crtc;
>> + if (crtc) {
>> + ret = drm_modeset_lock(&crtc->mutex, ctx);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&crtc-
>>> state->commit->hw_done);
>> + } else
>> + ret = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&conn_state-
>>> commit->hw_done);
> Shouldn't this wait on connection state be done even if a crtc was
> present?
If the connector is bound to a crtc, then having that idle will mean connector is idle too.
See drm_atomic_helper_setup_commit()
Other way around is not always true.
>> +
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + enable = psr_global_enabled(val);
>> +
>> + if (!enable)
>> + intel_psr_disable_locked(dev_priv->psr.dp);
>> +
>> + dev_priv->psr.debug = val;
>> + intel_psr_irq_control(dev_priv, dev_priv->psr.debug &
>> I915_PSR_DEBUG_IRQ);
>> +
>> + if (dev_priv->psr.prepared && enable)
>> + intel_psr_enable_locked(dev_priv,
>> to_intel_crtc_state(crtc->state));
>> +
>> + mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> static void intel_psr_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> {
>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
>> @@ -811,7 +896,8 @@ static void intel_psr_work(struct work_struct
>> *work)
>> if (dev_priv->psr.busy_frontbuffer_bits || dev_priv-
>>> psr.active)
>> goto unlock;
>>
>> - intel_psr_activate(dev_priv->psr.enabled);
>> + intel_psr_activate(dev_priv->psr.dp
>> +);
> ^typo
Indeed! Will fix.
>> unlock:
>> mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
>> }
>> @@ -866,7 +952,7 @@ void intel_psr_invalidate(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv,
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> - crtc = dp_to_dig_port(dev_priv->psr.enabled)-
>>> base.base.crtc;
>> + crtc = dp_to_dig_port(dev_priv->psr.dp)->base.base.crtc;
>> pipe = to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe;
>>
>> frontbuffer_bits &= INTEL_FRONTBUFFER_ALL_MASK(pipe);
>> @@ -909,7 +995,7 @@ void intel_psr_flush(struct drm_i915_private
>> *dev_priv,
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> - crtc = dp_to_dig_port(dev_priv->psr.enabled)-
>>> base.base.crtc;
>> + crtc = dp_to_dig_port(dev_priv->psr.dp)->base.base.crtc;
>> pipe = to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe;
>>
>> frontbuffer_bits &= INTEL_FRONTBUFFER_ALL_MASK(pipe);
>> @@ -991,7 +1077,7 @@ void intel_psr_short_pulse(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp)
>>
>> mutex_lock(&psr->lock);
>>
>> - if (psr->enabled != intel_dp)
>> + if (!psr->enabled || psr->dp != intel_dp)
>> goto exit;
>>
>> if (drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&intel_dp->aux, DP_PSR_STATUS, &val)
>> != 1) {
Thanks for review, will send a new version today.
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list