[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/i915: Pimp link training debug prints

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 07:48:18PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 07:09:02PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 08:05:34PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Unify all debug prints during link training to include information
> > > on both the encoder and the LTTPR. We unify the format to something
> > > like "[ENCODER:1:FOO][LTTPR 1] Something something". Though not
> > > sure if those brackets around the dp_phy just make it look like
> > > line noise? I'll accept suggestions on better formatting.
> > > 
> > > I'm slightly on the fence about also including the connector,
> > > but technically only the DPRX is the SST connector (ie.
> > > intel_dp->attached_connector). I suppose you could think of it
> > > as the branch device/whatever in the topology, and we're training
> > > the link leading to it. So that could argue for its inclusion.
> > > But it's all getting a bit long alrady, so not going to do it
> > > I think.
> > 
> > Imo including the connector info eventually would be good to be able to
> > match these lines with those only showing the connector, or connectors
> > in i915_display_info etc.
> 
> You're probably right. I was just looking at a dmesg wondering which
> connector it's training there...
> 
> Although with MST it of course doesn't match up with anything
> that the user thinks as a connected connector. So a bit annoying.
> And using a single MST connector wouldn't really lead to a
> coherent debug message either since there could be many MST
> connectors active on the same link :/

As a compromise I kept the SST connector name in the final passed/failed
debug print. That was the only place where we printed it previously as
well. Not ideal perhaps but at least it's something.

Series pushed. Thanks for the review.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel