[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: Refactor PSR status debugfs
Dhinakaran Pandiyan
dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com
Wed Jan 2 19:02:42 UTC 2019
On Wed, 2019-01-02 at 09:09 -0800, Souza, Jose wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 18:54 +0000, Souza, Jose wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 10:32 -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 04:44 -0800, Souza, Jose wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2018-12-10 at 22:51 -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 15:00 -0800, José Roberto de Souza
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > The old debugfs fields was not following a naming partern
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > a bit confusing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So it went from:
> > > > > > ~$ sudo more /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_edp_psr_status
> > > > > > Sink_Support: yes
> > > > > > PSR mode: PSR1
> > > > > > Enabled: yes
> > > > > > Busy frontbuffer bits: 0x000
> > > > > > Main link in standby mode: no
> > > > > > HW Enabled & Active bit: yes
> > > > > > Source PSR status: 0x24050006 [SRDONACK]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To:
> > > > > > ~$ sudo more /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_edp_psr_status
> > > > > > Sink support: yes [0x00000003]
> > > > > > Status: PSR1 enabled
> > > > > > Source PSR ctl: enabled [0x81f00e26]
> > > > > > Source PSR status: SRDENT [0x40040006]
> > > > > > Busy frontbuffer bits: 0x00000000
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The 'Main link in standby mode' was removed as it is not
> > > > > > useful
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > if needed by someone the information is still in the
> > > > > > register
> > > > > > value
> > > > > > of 'Source PSR ctl' inside of the brackets, PSR mode and
> > > > > > Enabled
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > squashed into Status, some renames and reorders and we have
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > cleaner version. This will also make easy to parse debugfs
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > IGT
> > > > > > tests.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > > > > > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> > > > > > Suggested-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <
> > > > > > dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 96 +++++++++++++++--
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > > > > index 38dcee1ca062..86303ba02666 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > > > > @@ -2665,7 +2665,8 @@
> > > > > > DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(i915_psr_sink_status);
> > > > > > static void
> > > > > > psr_source_status(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > > > > > struct
> > > > > > seq_file
> > > > > > *m)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > - u32 val, psr_status;
> > > > > > + u32 val, status_val;
> > > > > > + const char *status = "unknown";
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled) {
> > > > > > static const char * const live_status[] = {
> > > > > > @@ -2681,14 +2682,11 @@ psr_source_status(struct
> > > > > > drm_i915_private
> > > > > > *dev_priv, struct seq_file *m)
> > > > > > "BUF_ON",
> > > > > > "TG_ON"
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > - psr_status = I915_READ(EDP_PSR2_STATUS);
> > > > > > - val = (psr_status & EDP_PSR2_STATUS_STATE_MASK)
> > > > > > - EDP_PSR2_STATUS_STATE_SHIFT;
> > > > > > - if (val < ARRAY_SIZE(live_status)) {
> > > > > > - seq_printf(m, "Source PSR status: 0x%x
> > > > > > [%s]\n",
> > > > > > - psr_status,
> > > > > > live_status[val]);
> > > > > > - return;
> > > > > > - }
> > > > > > + val = I915_READ(EDP_PSR2_STATUS);
> > > > > > + status_val = (val & EDP_PSR2_STATUS_STATE_MASK)
> > > > > > + EDP_PSR2_STATUS_STATE_SHIFT;
> > > > > > + if (status_val < ARRAY_SIZE(live_status))
> > > > > > + status = live_status[status_val];
> > > > > > } else {
> > > > > > static const char * const live_status[] = {
> > > > > > "IDLE",
> > > > > > @@ -2700,74 +2698,78 @@ psr_source_status(struct
> > > > > > drm_i915_private
> > > > > > *dev_priv, struct seq_file *m)
> > > > > > "SRDOFFACK",
> > > > > > "SRDENT_ON",
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > - psr_status = I915_READ(EDP_PSR_STATUS);
> > > > > > - val = (psr_status & EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_MASK)
> > > > > > - EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_SHIFT;
> > > > > > - if (val < ARRAY_SIZE(live_status)) {
> > > > > > - seq_printf(m, "Source PSR status: 0x%x
> > > > > > [%s]\n",
> > > > > > - psr_status,
> > > > > > live_status[val]);
> > > > > > - return;
> > > > > > - }
> > > > > > + val = I915_READ(EDP_PSR_STATUS);
> > > > > > + status_val = (val & EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_MASK)
> > > > > > + EDP_PSR_STATUS_STATE_SHIFT;
> > > > > > + if (status_val < ARRAY_SIZE(live_status))
> > > > > > + status = live_status[status_val];
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - seq_printf(m, "Source PSR status: 0x%x [%s]\n",
> > > > > > psr_status,
> > > > > > "unknown");
> > > > > > + seq_printf(m, "Source PSR status: %s [0x%08x]\n",
> > > > > > status, val);
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file *m, void
> > > > > > *data)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m-
> > > > > > > private);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - u32 psrperf = 0;
> > > > > > - bool enabled = false;
> > > > > > - bool sink_support;
> > > > > > + struct i915_psr *psr = &dev_priv->psr;
> > > > > > + const char *status;
> > > > > > + bool enabled;
> > > > > > + u32 val;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (!HAS_PSR(dev_priv))
> > > > > > return -ENODEV;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - sink_support = dev_priv->psr.sink_support;
> > > > > > - seq_printf(m, "Sink_Support: %s\n",
> > > > > > yesno(sink_support));
> > > > > > - if (!sink_support)
> > > > > > + seq_printf(m, "Sink support: %s", yesno(psr-
> > > > > > > sink_support));
> > > > > >
> > > > > > + if (!psr->sink_support) {
> > > > > > + seq_puts(m, "\n");
> > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > intel_runtime_pm_get(dev_priv);
> > > > > > + mutex_lock(&psr->lock);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
> > > > > > - seq_printf(m, "PSR mode: %s\n",
> > > > > > - dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled ? "PSR2" :
> > > > > > "PSR1");
> > > > > > - 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);
> > > > > > + seq_printf(m, " [0x%08x]\n", psr->dp->psr_dpcd[0]);
> > > > >
> > > > > This can be moved closer to where "Sink support" is printed.
> > > > > Also, the
> > > > > extra zeroes that get printed due to "%08x" look odd, please
> > > > > consider
> > > > > changing it to "%02x".
> > > >
> > > > Done
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled)
> > > > > > - enabled = I915_READ(EDP_PSR2_CTL) &
> > > > > > EDP_PSR2_ENABLE;
> > > > > > + if (psr->enabled)
> > > > > > + status = psr->psr2_enabled ? "PSR2 enabled" :
> > > > > > "PSR1
> > > > > > enabled";
> > > > > > else
> > > > > > - enabled = I915_READ(EDP_PSR_CTL) &
> > > > > > EDP_PSR_ENABLE;
> > > > > > + status = "disabled";
> > > > > > + seq_printf(m, "Status: %s\n", status);
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we just use the ctl field and get rid of this? This
> > > > > status
> > > > > and
> > > > > and
> > > > > the one below can be confusing to those not familiar with the
> > > > > code
> > > > > base.
> > > > >
> > > > > We should be able to parse all the information we need from
> > > > > two
> > > > > lines
> > > > > Source PSR ctl: [PSR1,PSR2] enabled <reg value>
> > > > > Source PSR status: <state> <reg value>
> > > >
> > > > I'm fine in having just one but when there is frontbuffer
> > > > modifications
> > > > Status is kept as enabled and Source PSR ctl and Source PSR
> > > > status
> > > > are
> > > > set to idle states,
> > >
> > > That is a good point - psr_invalidate() would disable the
> > > feature
> > > in
> > > hardware but the driver state is enabled. I guess, you could
> > > change
> > > "Status" to "PSR mode"/"Feature state".
> > > ...
> > > PSR mode: {PSR1 enabled, PSR2 enabled, disabled}
> > > Source PSR ctl: {enabled, disabled} ...
> > > Source PSR status: ...
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Is this better?
> > >
> >
> > Yeah looks good to me.
> >
> > > Also, it might be worth printing the "PSR mode:" line even when
> > > there
> > > is no sink_support. It's an useful piece of debug information and
> > > doesn't access the hardware.
>
> About this one, to read psr->enable and psr->psr2_enabled we take PSR
> mutex and it is only initialized if sink support PSR.
> If that information is useful when doing IGT changes I will send it
> in
> a separate patch, sounds good?
Yeah, that's fine.
-DK
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list