[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915/display: Handle fused off display correctly

[Jani Nikula]

On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c at intel.com> wrote:
> On 2019-10-18 at 17:41:20 -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
>> If all pipes are fused off it means that display is disabled, similar
>> like we handle for GEN 7 and 8 right above but for GEN9+ spec says
>> that hardware will override the pipe output to a solid color, so
>> some display is there and maybe we would need to shutdown display
>> to save power, so setting disable_display = true, to keep consistent
>> to HAS_DISPLAY() and INTEL_DISPLAY_ENABLED().
>> 
>> In addition to have all pipes fused off, GEN/display 9 have the
>> bit 30 "Internal Display Disable", not sure if all pipes will be set
>> as unfused when this bit is set so handling both.
>> 
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Martin Peres <martin.peres at linux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h          | 21 +++++++++++----------
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c | 14 ++++++++++----
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>> index 855db888516c..6e3ae6e9cbb8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
>> @@ -7651,16 +7651,17 @@ enum {
>>  #define   MASK_WAKEMEM			(1 << 13)
>>  #define   CNL_DDI_CLOCK_REG_ACCESS_ON	(1 << 7)
>>  
>> -#define SKL_DFSM			_MMIO(0x51000)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_MASK	(3 << 23)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_675	(0 << 23)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_540	(1 << 23)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_450	(2 << 23)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_337_5	(3 << 23)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_A_DISABLE		(1 << 30)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_B_DISABLE		(1 << 21)
>> -#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_C_DISABLE		(1 << 28)
>> -#define TGL_DFSM_PIPE_D_DISABLE		(1 << 22)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM				_MMIO(0x51000)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_INTERNAL_DISPLAY_DISABLE	(1 << 30)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_MASK		(3 << 23)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_675		(0 << 23)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_540		(1 << 23)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_450		(2 << 23)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_CDCLK_LIMIT_337_5		(3 << 23)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_A_DISABLE			(1 << 30)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_B_DISABLE			(1 << 21)
>> +#define SKL_DFSM_PIPE_C_DISABLE			(1 << 28)
>> +#define TGL_DFSM_PIPE_D_DISABLE			(1 << 22)
>>  
>>  #define SKL_DSSM				_MMIO(0x51004)
>>  #define CNL_DSSM_CDCLK_PLL_REFCLK_24MHz		(1 << 31)
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> index 85e480bdc673..8d6492afdd6a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_device_info.c
>> @@ -972,15 +972,21 @@ void intel_device_info_runtime_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>  			enabled_mask &= ~BIT(PIPE_D);
>>  
>>  		/*
>> -		 * At least one pipe should be enabled and if there are
>> -		 * disabled pipes, they should be the last ones, with no holes
>> -		 * in the mask.
>> +		 * If there are disabled pipes, they should be the last ones,
>> +		 * with no holes in the mask.
>>  		 */
>> -		if (enabled_mask == 0 || !is_power_of_2(enabled_mask + 1))
>> +		if (enabled_mask && !is_power_of_2(enabled_mask + 1))
>>  			DRM_ERROR("invalid pipe fuse configuration: enabled_mask=0x%x\n",
>>  				  enabled_mask);
>>  		else
>>  			info->pipe_mask = enabled_mask;
>> +
>> +		if ((INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) == 9 && !IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv)) &&
>> +		    (dfsm & SKL_DFSM_INTERNAL_DISPLAY_DISABLE))
>> +			i915_modparams.disable_display = true;
>> +
>> +		if (!enabled_mask)
>> +			i915_modparams.disable_display = true;
> Do we really need to set the disable_display here? on Gen 7 and 8 when
> it is fused off, we were setting pipe_mask to 0. why that wont work
> here?
>
> INTEL_NUM_PIPES and HAS_DISPLAY both are based on pipe_mask only.

Indeed that's one of the problematic features of the patch; the
->pipe_mask won't reflect reality. But then INTEL_DISPLAY_ENABLED()
assumes you *do* have display...

BR,
Jani.



-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center