W dniu 07.09.2021 o 16:25, Marek Vasut pisze: > On 9/7/21 9:31 AM, Andrzej Hajda wrote: >> On 07.09.2021 04:39, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> In rare cases, the bridge may not start up correctly, which usually >>> leads to no display output. In case this happens, warn about it in >>> the kernel log. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> --- >>> NOTE: See the following: >>> https://e2e.ti.com/support/interface-group/interface/f/interface-forum/942005/sn65dsi83-dsi83-lvds-bridge---sporadic-behavior---no-video >>> >>> https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/i-MX8M-MIPI-DSI-Interface-LVDS-Bridge-Initialization/td-p/1156533 >>> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c | 5 +++++ >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c >>> index a32f70bc68ea4..4ea71d7f0bfbc 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c >>> @@ -520,6 +520,11 @@ static void sn65dsi83_atomic_enable(struct >>> drm_bridge *bridge, >>> /* Clear all errors that got asserted during initialization. */ >>> regmap_read(ctx->regmap, REG_IRQ_STAT, &pval); >>> regmap_write(ctx->regmap, REG_IRQ_STAT, pval); >> >> >> It does not look as correct error handling, maybe it would be good to >> analyze and optionally report 'unexpected' errors here as well. > > The above is correct -- it clears the status register because the > setup might've set random bits in that register. Then we wait a bit, > let the link run, and read them again to get the real link status in > this new piece of code below, hence the usleep_range there. And then > if the link indicates a problem, we know it is a problem. Usually such registers are cleared on very beginning of the initialization, and tested (via irq handler, or via reading), during initalization, if initialization phase goes well. If it is not the case forgive me. > >>> + >>> + usleep_range(10000, 12000); >>> + regmap_read(ctx->regmap, REG_IRQ_STAT, &pval); >>> + if (pval) >>> + dev_err(ctx->dev, "Unexpected link status 0x%02x\n", pval); >> >> >> I am not sure what is the case here but it looks like 'we do not know >> what is going on, so let's add some diagnostic messages to gather info >> and figure it out later'. > > That's pretty much the case, see the two links above in the NOTE > section. If something goes wrong, we print the value for the user > (usually developer) so they can fix their problems. We cannot do much > better in the attach callback. > > The issue I ran into (and where this would be helpful information to > me during debugging, since the issue happened real seldom, see also > the NOTE links above) is that the DSI controller driver started > streaming video on the data lanes before the DSI83 had a chance to > initialize. This worked most of the time, except for a few exceptions > here and there, where the video didn't start. This does set link > status bits consistently. In the meantime, I fixed the controller > driver (so far downstream, due to ongoing discussion). Maybe drm_connector_set_link_status_property(conn, DRM_MODE_LINK_STATUS_BAD) would be usefule here. > >> Whole driver lacks IRQ handler which IMO could perform better diagnosis, >> and I guess it could also help in recovery, but this is just my guess. >> So if this patch is enough for now you can add: > > No, IRQ won't help you here, because by the time you get the IRQ, the > DSI host already started streaming video on data lanes and you won't > be able to correctly reinit the DSI83 unless you communicate to the > DSI host that it should switch the data lanes back to LP11. > > And for that, there is a bigger chunk missing really. What needs to be > added is a way for the DSI bridge / panel to communicate its needs to > the DSI host -- things like "I need DSI clock lane frequency f MHz, I > need clock lane in HS mode and data lanes in LP11 mode". If you look > at the way DSI hosts and bridges/panels work out the DSI link > parameters, you will notice they basically do it each on their own, > there is no such API or communication channel. There is one-time communication channel via mipi_dsi_attach, it allows to set max frequency i HS and LP, choose mode of operation (HS/LPM) and few more things. If it is necessary to extend it please propse sth. Regarding requesting LP11 I am not sure if we really should have such low level communication. LP11, as I remember ,is initial state in HS so it should be set anyway, before starting video transmission. And maybe this is the main problem: DRM core calls: crtc->enable bridges->pre_enable, encoder->enable, bridges->enable. Usually video transmission starts in crtc->enable (CRTC->Encoder), and in encoder->enable (encoder->bridge), so in bridges->enable it would be too late for LP11 state - transmission can be already in progress. It shows well that this order of calls does not fit well to DSI, and probably many other protocols. Maybe moving most of the bridge->enable code to bridge->pre_enable would help, but I am not sur if it will not pose another issues. This is quick analysis, so please fix me if I am wrong. Regards Andrzej
