[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/psr: Force PSR probe only after full initialization
Souza, Jose
jose.souza at intel.com
Fri Feb 21 18:15:29 UTC 2020
On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 15:46 +0000, Mun, Gwan-gyeong wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 12:55 -0800, Souza, Jose wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 12:39 +0000, Mun, Gwan-gyeong wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 12:39 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > > > Commit 60c6a14b489b ("drm/i915/display: Force the state compute
> > > > phase
> > > > once to enable PSR") was forcing the state compute too earlier
> > > > causing errors because not everything was initialized, so here
> > > > moving to i915_driver_register() when everything is ready and
> > > > driver
> > > > is registering into the rest of the system.
> > > >
> > > > Also fixing the place where it disarm the force probe as during
> > > > the
> > > > atomic check phase errors could happen like the ones due
> > > > locking
> > > > and
> > > > it would cause PSR to never be enabled if that happens.
> > > > Leaving the disarm to the atomic commit phase,
> > > > intel_psr_enable()
> > > > or
> > > > intel_psr_update() will be called even if the current state do
> > > > not
> > > > allow PSR to be enabled.
> > > >
> > > > v2: Check if intel_dp is null in
> > > > intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set()
> > > > v3: Check intel_dp before get dev_priv
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 60c6a14b489b ("drm/i915/display: Force the state compute
> > > > phase
> > > > once to enable PSR")
> > > > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1151
> > > > Tested-by: Ross Zwisler <zwisler at google.com>
> > > > Reported-by: Ross Zwisler <zwisler at google.com>
> > > > Cc: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun at intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 22
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h | 1 +
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 3 +++
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +-
> > > > 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > > > index b4942b6445ae..2a0f7354fba5 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > > > @@ -936,6 +936,8 @@ void intel_psr_enable(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp,
> > > > {
> > > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
> > > > dp_to_i915(intel_dp);
> > > >
> > > > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(intel_dp, false);
> > > > +
> > > Hi,
> > > intel_psr_enable() and intel_psr_update already have checking
> > > routine
> > > for CAN_PSR and has_psr.
> > > therefore we don't need to check twice here.
> >
> > Minor overhead but if you really want I can remove the function
> > call
> > and just do a dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed = false; for
> > intel_psr_enable/update
> >
> > > And if there are no issues that moving "disarming
> > > force_mode_changed"
> > > to intel_psr_compute_config(),
> > > can we move them to intel_psr_compute_config()?
> >
> > atomic check can fail at any point so we could disarm the
> > mode_changed,
> > fail, retry(because the return was EAGAIN) and then PSR will not be
> > enabled.
> >
> If disarming the "force_mode_changed" would be handled on
> intel_psr_compute_config(),
> (after failing atomic check and)the retry step will set "crtc_state-
> > mode_changed = true" on
> intel_digital_connector_atomic_check(). ( because the
> force_mode_changed is not disabled yet.)
>
> The mode_changed will lead "encoder->compute_config" which will call
> intel_psr_compute_config().
> And we can disable "force_mode_changed" on intel_psr_compute_config()
> which sets "crtc_state->has_psr = true".
> the "crtc_state->has_psr" enables PSR.
After call encoder->compute_config()->intel_psr_compute_config() there
is a lot of code left to be executed in intel_atomic_check() that can
cause the atomic check to fail.
The next pipe in this loop can already cause that.
>
> > > > if (!crtc_state->has_psr)
> > > > return;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1096,6 +1098,8 @@ void intel_psr_update(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp,
> > > > struct i915_psr *psr = &dev_priv->psr;
> > > > bool enable, psr2_enable;
> > > >
> > > > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(intel_dp, false);
> > > > +
> > > > if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || READ_ONCE(psr->dp) !=
> > > > intel_dp)
> > > > return;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1629,7 +1633,7 @@ void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct
> > > > drm_connector *connector,
> > > > struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state;
> > > >
> > > > if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || !new_state->crtc ||
> > > > - dev_priv->psr.initially_probed)
> > > > + !dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed)
> > > > return;
> > > >
> > > > intel_connector = to_intel_connector(connector);
> > > > @@ -1640,5 +1644,19 @@ void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct
> > > > drm_connector *connector,
> > > > crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(new_state-
> > > > >state,
> > > > new_state-
> > > > >crtc);
> > > > crtc_state->mode_changed = true;
> > > > - dev_priv->psr.initially_probed = true;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +void intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp,
> > > > bool set)
> > > IMHO, it would be better intel_psr_set_force_mode_changed() as a
> > > function name.
> >
> > Okay
> >
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!intel_dp)
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + dev_priv = dp_to_i915(intel_dp);
> > > > + if (!CAN_PSR(dev_priv) || !intel_dp_is_edp(intel_dp) ||
> > > > + intel_dp != dev_priv->psr.dp)
> > > > + return;
> > > > +
> > > > + dev_priv->psr.force_mode_changed = set;
> > > > }
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > > > index c58a1d438808..27a70468e2b9 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.h
> > > > @@ -40,5 +40,6 @@ bool intel_psr_enabled(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp);
> > > > void intel_psr_atomic_check(struct drm_connector *connector,
> > > > struct drm_connector_state
> > > > *old_state,
> > > > struct drm_connector_state
> > > > *new_state);
> > > > +void intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp,
> > > > bool set);
> > > >
> > > > #endif /* __INTEL_PSR_H__ */
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > > index f7a1c33697b7..83791c197611 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
> > > > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@
> > > > #include "display/intel_hotplug.h"
> > > > #include "display/intel_overlay.h"
> > > > #include "display/intel_pipe_crc.h"
> > > > +#include "display/intel_psr.h"
> > > > #include "display/intel_sprite.h"
> > > > #include "display/intel_vga.h"
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1256,6 +1257,8 @@ static void i915_driver_register(struct
> > > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > >
> > > > intel_audio_init(dev_priv);
> > > >
> > > > + intel_psr_force_mode_changed_set(dev_priv->psr.dp,
> > > > true);
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * Some ports require correctly set-up hpd registers
> > > > for
> > > > detection to
> > > > * work properly (leading to ghost connected connector
> > > > status),
> > > > e.g. VGA
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > > index 3330b538d379..a546655072bd 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > > @@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ struct i915_psr {
> > > > bool dc3co_enabled;
> > > > u32 dc3co_exit_delay;
> > > > struct delayed_work dc3co_work;
> > > > - bool initially_probed;
> > > > + bool force_mode_changed;
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > #define QUIRK_LVDS_SSC_DISABLE (1<<1)
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list