On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 03:06:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 06:45:00PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>>> > v2: Prefer seq_puts to seq_printf by Paulo Zanoni.
>>> > v3: small changes like avoiding calling dp_to_dig_port twice as noticed by
>>> > Paulo Zanoni.
>>> > v4: Avoiding reading non-existent registers - noticed by Paulo
>>> > on first psr debugfs patch.
>>> > v5: Accepting more suggestions from Paulo:
>>> > * check sw interlace flag instead of i915_read
>>> > * introduce PSR_S3D_ENABLED to avoid forgeting it whenever added.
>>> >
>>> > Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zan...@intel.com>
>>> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@gmail.com>
>>> > ---
>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 13 +++++++
>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 7 ++++
>>> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 74
>>> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> > 4 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>> >
>>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> > index fe3cd5a..e679968 100644
>>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> > @@ -1948,17 +1948,47 @@ static int i915_edp_psr_status(struct seq_file
>>> > *m, void *data)
>>> > struct drm_info_node *node = m->private;
>>> > struct drm_device *dev = node->minor->dev;
>>> > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>>> > - u32 psrctl, psrstat, psrperf;
>>> > + u32 psrstat, psrperf;
>>> >
>>> > - if (!IS_HASWELL(dev)) {
>>> > - seq_puts(m, "PSR not supported on this platform\n");
>>> > + if (IS_HASWELL(dev) && I915_READ(EDP_PSR_CTL) & EDP_PSR_ENABLE) {
>>> > + seq_puts(m, "PSR enabled\n");
>>> > + } else {
>>> > + seq_puts(m, "PSR disabled: ");
>>> > + switch (dev_priv->no_psr_reason) {
>>> > + case PSR_NO_SOURCE:
>>>
>>> I am not a fan of using a continually expanding set of enums for
>>> no_psr_reason (and no_fbc_reason). If we just stored a const char
>>> *no_psr_reason, it would make like much easier for us (fewer lines and a
>>> smaller object).
>>>
>>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> > index d4b52a9..c0bd887 100644
>>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>>> > @@ -1497,11 +1497,83 @@ static void intel_edp_psr_enable_source(struct
>>> > intel_dp *intel_dp)
>>> > EDP_PSR_ENABLE);
>>> > }
>>> >
>>> > +static bool intel_edp_psr_match_conditions(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
>>> > +{
>>> > + struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
>>> > + struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev;
>>> > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>>> > + struct drm_crtc *crtc = dig_port->base.base.crtc;
>>> > + struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
>>> > + struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = to_intel_framebuffer(crtc->fb)->obj;
>>> > + struct intel_encoder *intel_encoder = &dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp)->base;
>>> > +
>>> > + if (!IS_HASWELL(dev)) {
>>> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR not supported on this platform\n");
>>> > + dev_priv->no_psr_reason = PSR_NO_SOURCE;
>>> > + return false;
>>> > + }
>>> > +
>>> > + if ((intel_encoder->type != INTEL_OUTPUT_EDP) ||
>>> > + (dig_port->port != PORT_A)) {
>>> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HSW ties PSR to DDI A (eDP)\n");
>>> > + dev_priv->no_psr_reason = PSR_HSW_NOT_DDIA;
>>> > + return false;
>>> > + }
>>> > +
>>> > + if (!is_edp_psr(intel_dp)) {
>>> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR not supported by this panel\n");
>>> > + dev_priv->no_psr_reason = PSR_NO_SINK;
>>> > + return false;
>>> > + }
>>> > +
>>> > + if (!intel_crtc->active || !crtc->fb || !crtc->mode.clock) {
>>> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("crtc not active for PSR\n");
>>> > + dev_priv->no_psr_reason = PSR_CRTC_NOT_ACTIVE;
>>> > + return false;
>>> > + }
>>> > +
>>> > + if ((I915_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_DRIVER) & HSW_PWR_WELL_ENABLE) ||
>>> > + (I915_READ(HSW_PWR_WELL_KVMR) & HSW_PWR_WELL_ENABLE)) {
>>>
>>> Any time we resort to reading back register state is a failure in our
>>> state tracking (and pipe_config).
>>
>> Highly agreed, especially if it's a resource which is out of our control
>> like the KVMR bits. Since that's just plain broken I've removed it from
>> the patch.
>
> Since Audio guys will enable power well and let it enabled all the
> time, I'm wondering in mask LPSP at PSR_DEBUG_CTL.
> So PSR can work even with power well enabled.
> What do you think?
I have honestly no idea ... have you poked Art about this?
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
