[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/psr: Split sink status into a separate debugfs node
Rodrigo Vivi
rodrigo.vivi at intel.com
Thu Jul 5 21:37:23 UTC 2018
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 02:27:46PM -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> On Thursday, July 5, 2018 2:04:18 PM PDT Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 05:31:21PM -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> > > This allows to read i915_edp_psr_status from tests without triggering
> > > any AUX communication. Take this opportunity to move this under the
> > > eDP-1 connector directory as the status we print is of the sink.
> > >
> > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > > Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> > > Suggested-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 69
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+),
> > > 30 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c index f6142d78ede4..5069d5dedafe
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > @@ -2592,6 +2592,41 @@ static const struct file_operations
> > > i915_guc_log_relay_fops = {>
> > > .release = i915_guc_log_relay_release,
> > >
> > > };
> > >
> > > +static int i915_psr_sink_status_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data)
> > > +{
> > > + u8 val;
> > > + static const char * const sink_status[] = {
> > > + "inactive",
> > > + "transition to active, capture and display",
> > > + "active, display from RFB",
> > > + "active, capture and display on sink device timings",
> > > + "transition to inactive, capture and display, timing re-sync",
> > > + "reserved",
> > > + "reserved",
> > > + "sink internal error",
> > > + };
> > > + struct drm_connector *connector = m->private;
> > > + struct intel_dp *intel_dp =
> > > + enc_to_intel_dp(&intel_attached_encoder(connector)->base);
> > > +
> > > + if (connector->status != connector_status_connected)
> > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > +
> > > + if (drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&intel_dp->aux, DP_PSR_STATUS, &val) == 1) {
> > > + const char *str = "unknown";
> > > +
> > > + val &= DP_PSR_SINK_STATE_MASK;
> > > + if (val < ARRAY_SIZE(sink_status))
> > > + str = sink_status[val];
> > > + seq_printf(m, "Sink PSR status: 0x%x [%s]\n", val, str);
> > > + } else {
> > > + DRM_ERROR("dpcd read (at %u) failed\n", DP_PSR_STATUS);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(i915_psr_sink_status);
> > > +
> > >
> > > static void
> > > psr_source_status(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, struct seq_file *m)
> > > {
> > >
> > > @@ -2643,26 +2678,6 @@ psr_source_status(struct drm_i915_private
> > > *dev_priv, struct seq_file *m)>
> > > seq_printf(m, "Source PSR status: 0x%x [%s]\n", psr_status,
> "unknown");
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > -static const char *psr_sink_status(u8 val)
> > > -{
> > > - static const char * const sink_status[] = {
> > > - "inactive",
> > > - "transition to active, capture and display",
> > > - "active, display from RFB",
> > > - "active, capture and display on sink device timings",
> > > - "transition to inactive, capture and display, timing re-sync",
> > > - "reserved",
> > > - "reserved",
> > > - "sink internal error"
> > > - };
> > > -
> > > - val &= DP_PSR_SINK_STATE_MASK;
> > > - if (val < ARRAY_SIZE(sink_status))
> > > - return sink_status[val];
> > > -
> > > - return "unknown";
> > > -}
> > > -
> > >
> > > static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file *m, void *data)
> > > {
> > >
> > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private);
> > >
> > > @@ -2706,15 +2721,6 @@ static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file *m,
> > > void *data)>
> > > }
> > >
> > > psr_source_status(dev_priv, m);
> > >
> > > -
> > > - if (dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
> > > - struct drm_dp_aux *aux = &dev_priv->psr.enabled->aux;
> > > - u8 val;
> > > -
> > > - if (drm_dp_dpcd_readb(aux, DP_PSR_STATUS, &val) == 1)
> > > - seq_printf(m, "Sink PSR status: 0x%x [%s]\n", val,
> > > - psr_sink_status(val));
> > > - }
> > >
> > > mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
> >
> > I wonder if we shouldn't get this lock there to make sure taat no
> > PSR transition from our driver is getting called.
> >
> This lock was useful as we wanted dev_priv->psr.enabled == intel_dp to be
> valid. I don't see why we have to serialize sink DPCD reads w.r.t the driver's
> PSR state transitions.
hm... makes sense...
>
> > > if (READ_ONCE(dev_priv->psr.debug)) {
> > >
> > > @@ -4971,9 +4977,12 @@ int i915_debugfs_connector_add(struct drm_connector
> > > *connector)>
> > > debugfs_create_file("i915_dpcd", S_IRUGO, root,
> > >
> > > connector, &i915_dpcd_fops);
> > >
> > > - if (connector->connector_type == DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP)
> > > + if (connector->connector_type == DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP) {
> >
> > it seems that we should also move the other status file here to this
> > block...
>
> Do you mean i915_edp_psr_status? As I see it, that is a feature specific
> debugfs node that includes source information as well. The ones under
> $debugfs/eDP-1/ are all panel related.
oh good point...
>
> > > debugfs_create_file("i915_panel_timings", S_IRUGO, root,
> > >
> > > connector, &i915_panel_fops);
> > >
> > > + debugfs_create_file("i915_psr_sink_status", S_IRUGO, root,
> > > + connector, &i915_psr_sink_status_fops);
> >
> > ... and also rename the other 2 entries to be in pair with this new one:
> >
> > or all i915_edp_psr or all i915_psr...
> >
> I wrote this as i915_psr and realized that it might get confusing since we
> also have i915_edp_psr_status for feature status. And "_edp_" is redundant
> because all the nodes are under the eDP-1 directory. But, yeah I can change
> it to "i915_psr" if you think that is better.
well, the i915_edp_psr_status is before we had this directory I think
and the idea of having the "_edp_" was to name it as eDP-1 when we had multiple cases...
So, whatever we decide for that... move or not to eDP-1, remove or not "_edp_"
I think we should do in a separated patch...
So, for this one here:
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>
> > > + }
> > >
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > }
>
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list