[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 12/23] drm/i915: Sanitize the TypeC connect/detect sequences
Imre Deak
imre.deak at intel.com
Sat Jun 8 17:40:36 UTC 2019
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 01:15:44AM +0300, Souza, Jose wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-06-04 at 17:58 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > Make the order during detection more consistent: first reset the
> > TypeC
> > port mode if needed (adding new helpers for this), then detect any
> > connected sink.
> >
> > To check if a port mode reset is needed determine first the target
> > port
> > mode based on the live status if a sink is already connected or the
> > PHY status complete flag otherwise.
> >
> > Add a WARN in legacy mode if unexpectedly we can't set the unsafe
> > mode
> > or if the FIA doesn't provide the 4 lanes required.
> >
> > Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
> > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tc.c | 104 +++++++++++++++---------------
> > --
> > 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tc.c
> > index d91381c0e87d..9832e2ddb92e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_tc.c
> > @@ -188,43 +188,46 @@ static bool icl_tc_phy_set_safe_mode(struct
> > intel_digital_port *dig_port,
> > * will require a lot of coordination with user space and thorough
> > testing for
> > * the extra possible cases.
> > */
> > -static bool icl_tc_phy_connect(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > +static void icl_tc_phy_connect(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > {
> > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dig_port-
> > >base.base.dev);
> > enum tc_port tc_port = intel_port_to_tc(dev_priv, dig_port-
> > >base.port);
> > - u32 live_status_mask;
> > -
> > - if (dig_port->tc_mode != TC_PORT_LEGACY &&
> > - dig_port->tc_mode != TC_PORT_DP_ALT)
> > - return true;
> >
> > if (!icl_tc_phy_status_complete(dig_port)) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Port %s: PHY not ready\n",
> > tc_port_name(dev_priv, tc_port));
> > - WARN_ON(dig_port->tc_legacy_port);
> > - return false;
> > + goto out_set_tbt_alt_mode;
> > }
> >
> > - if (!icl_tc_phy_set_safe_mode(dig_port, false))
> > - return false;
> > + if (!icl_tc_phy_set_safe_mode(dig_port, false) &&
> > + !WARN_ON(dig_port->tc_legacy_port))
> > + goto out_set_tbt_alt_mode;
> >
> > - if (dig_port->tc_mode == TC_PORT_LEGACY)
> > - return true;
> > + if (dig_port->tc_legacy_port) {
> > + WARN_ON(intel_tc_port_fia_max_lane_count(dig_port) !=
> > 4);
> > + dig_port->tc_mode = TC_PORT_LEGACY;
> >
> > - live_status_mask = tc_port_live_status_mask(dig_port);
> > + return;
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Now we have to re-check the live state, in case the port
> > recently
> > * became disconnected. Not necessary for legacy mode.
> > */
> > - if (!(live_status_mask & BIT(TC_PORT_DP_ALT))) {
> > + if (!(tc_port_live_status_mask(dig_port) &
> > BIT(TC_PORT_DP_ALT))) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Port %s: PHY sudden disconnect\n",
> > tc_port_name(dev_priv, tc_port));
> > - icl_tc_phy_disconnect(dig_port);
> > - return false;
> > + goto out_set_safe_mode;
> > }
> >
> > - return true;
> > + dig_port->tc_mode = TC_PORT_DP_ALT;
> > +
> > + return;
> > +
> > +out_set_safe_mode:
> > + icl_tc_phy_set_safe_mode(dig_port, true);
> > +out_set_tbt_alt_mode:
> > + dig_port->tc_mode = TC_PORT_TBT_ALT;
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -233,9 +236,6 @@ static bool icl_tc_phy_connect(struct
> > intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > */
> > void icl_tc_phy_disconnect(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > {
> > - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dig_port-
> > >base.base.dev);
> > - enum tc_port tc_port = intel_port_to_tc(dev_priv, dig_port-
> > >base.port);
> > -
> > switch (dig_port->tc_mode) {
> > case TC_PORT_LEGACY:
> > case TC_PORT_DP_ALT:
> > @@ -248,31 +248,41 @@ void icl_tc_phy_disconnect(struct
> > intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > default:
> > MISSING_CASE(dig_port->tc_mode);
> > }
> > -
> > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Port %s: mode %s disconnected\n",
> > - tc_port_name(dev_priv, tc_port),
> > - tc_port_mode_name(dig_port->tc_mode));
> > }
> >
> > -static void icl_update_tc_port_type(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv,
> > - struct intel_digital_port
> > *intel_dig_port,
> > - u32 live_status_mask)
> > +static enum tc_port_mode
> > +intel_tc_port_get_target_mode(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > {
> > - enum port port = intel_dig_port->base.port;
> > - enum tc_port_mode old_mode = intel_dig_port->tc_mode;
> > + u32 live_status_mask = tc_port_live_status_mask(dig_port);
> >
> > - if (!live_status_mask)
> > - return;
> > + if (live_status_mask)
> > + return fls(live_status_mask) - 1;
> > +
> > + return icl_tc_phy_status_complete(dig_port) &&
> > + dig_port->tc_legacy_port ? TC_PORT_LEGACY :
> > + TC_PORT_TBT_ALT;
>
> This will return 0 or 1, never TC_PORT_LEGACY(2) because of the "&&".
Nope, C operators precedence is first "&&" then "?:". Should be fine.
> -TOOMANYREFACTORS
> Staring to love again huge patches :P
Well all the previous refactorings should be easier to review, since
they don't change the functionality.
The hope was that the refactoring patches make the review of this one
- with functionality changes - easier to review.
>
> > +}
> >
> > - intel_dig_port->tc_mode = fls(live_status_mask) - 1;
> > +static void intel_tc_port_reset_mode(struct intel_digital_port
> > *dig_port)
> > +{
> > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dig_port-
> > >base.base.dev);
> > + enum tc_port tc_port = intel_port_to_tc(dev_priv, dig_port-
> > >base.port);
> > + enum tc_port_mode old_tc_mode = dig_port->tc_mode;
> >
> > - if (old_mode != intel_dig_port->tc_mode)
> > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Port %s: port has mode %s\n",
> > - tc_port_name(dev_priv,
> > - intel_port_to_tc(dev_priv,
> > port)),
> > - tc_port_mode_name(intel_dig_port-
> > >tc_mode));
> > + icl_tc_phy_disconnect(dig_port);
> > + icl_tc_phy_connect(dig_port);
> > +
> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Port %s: TC port mode reset (%s -> %s)\n",
> > + tc_port_name(dev_priv, tc_port),
> > + tc_port_mode_name(old_tc_mode),
> > + tc_port_mode_name(dig_port->tc_mode));
> > }
> >
> > +static bool
> > +intel_tc_port_needs_reset(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > +{
> > + return intel_tc_port_get_target_mode(dig_port) != dig_port-
> > >tc_mode;
> > +}
> >
> > /*
> > * The type-C ports are different because even when they are
> > connected, they may
> > @@ -286,23 +296,9 @@ static void icl_update_tc_port_type(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > */
> > bool intel_tc_port_connected(struct intel_digital_port *dig_port)
> > {
> > - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dig_port-
> > >base.base.dev);
> > - u32 live_status_mask = tc_port_live_status_mask(dig_port);
> > + if (intel_tc_port_needs_reset(dig_port))
> > + intel_tc_port_reset_mode(dig_port);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * The spec says we shouldn't be using the ISR bits for
> > detecting
> > - * between TC and TBT. We should use DFLEXDPSP.
> > - */
> > - if (!live_status_mask && !dig_port->tc_legacy_port) {
> > - icl_tc_phy_disconnect(dig_port);
> > -
> > - return false;
> > - }
> > -
> > - icl_update_tc_port_type(dev_priv, dig_port, live_status_mask);
> > - if (!icl_tc_phy_connect(dig_port))
> > - return false;
> > -
> > - return true;
> > + return tc_port_live_status_mask(dig_port) & BIT(dig_port-
> > >tc_mode);
> > }
> >
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list