On 2/24/2022 8:22 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 05:01, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/24/2022 12:41 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 at 21:25, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/18/2022 6:26 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On 19/02/2022 02:56, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-02-11 14:40:02)
In commit 8a3b4c17f863 ("drm/msm/dp: employ bridge mechanism for display
enable and disable") the DP driver received a drm_bridge instance, which
is always attached to the encoder as a root bridge. However it conflicts
with the panel_bridge support for eDP panels. The panel bridge attaches
to the encoder before the "dp" bridge has a chace to do so. Change
s/chace/chance/
panel_bridge attachment to come after dp_bridge attachment.
s/panel_bridge/panel bridge/ possibly? And maybe clarify that dp_bridge
is the "DP driver's drm_bridge instance created in
msm_dp_bridge_init()"?
My understanding is that we want to pass the bridge created in
msm_dp_bridge_init() as the 'previous' bridge so that it attaches the
panel bridge to the output of the DP bridge that's attached to the
encoder.
Thanks! I'll update the commit log when pushing the patches.
Please correct if i am missing something here.
You are right that the eDP panel's panel bridge attaches to the encoder
in dp_drm_connector_init() which happens before msm_dp_bridge_init() and
hence it will attach directly to the encoder.
But we are talking about different encoders here. DP's dp_display has a
different encoder compared to the EDP's dp_display.
The encoders are different. However both encoders use the same
codepath, which includes dp_bridge. It controls dp_display by calling
msm_dp_display_foo() functions.
So DP's bridge will still be attached to its encoder's root.
There is one dp_bridge per each encoder. Consider sc8180x which has 3
DP controllers (and thus 3 dp_bridges).
Sorry, but I still didnt follow this.
So for eDP, dp_drm_connector_init() will attach the panel_bridge
and then msm_dp_bridge_init() will add a drm_bridge.
And yes in that case, the drm_bridge will be after the panel_bridge
But since panel_bridge is at the root for eDP it should be okay.
No. It is not.
For both DP and eDP the chain should be:
dpu_encoder -> dp_bridge -> external (panel) bridge, optional for DP
-> [other bridges] -> connector
Otherwise drm_bridge_chain_foo() functions would be called in the
incorrect order.
Agreed. For drm_bridge_chain_foo() ordering to be correct, for eDP chain
the order should be what you mentioned and panel_bridge should be at the
end ( should be the last one ).
For the above reason,
Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
I still didnt understand what gets affected by this for the
msm_dp_display_foo() functions you mentioned earlier and wanted to get
some clarity on that.
Thus the dp_bridge should be attached directly to the encoder
(drm_encoder) and panel_bridge should use dp_bridge as the 'previous'
bridge.
Agreed.
For example, for the DP port one can use a display-connector (which
actually implements drm_bridge) as an external bridge to provide hpd
or dp power GPIOs.
Note, that the current dp_connector breaks layering. It makes calls
directly into dp_display, not allowing external bridge (and other
bridges) to override get_modes/mode_valid and other callbacks.
Thus one of the next patches in series (the one that Kuogee had issues
with) tries to replace the chain with the following one:
dpu_encoder -> dp_bridge -> external (panel) bridge -> [other bridges]
-> drm_bridge_connector.
So originally the plan was always that the DP connector layer intercepts
the call because panel-eDP file did not support reading of the EDID ( we
have not provided the aux bus ). So it was intended that we did not want
to goto the eDP panel to get the modes. Not an error but something which
we wanted to cleanup later when we moved to panel-eDP completely.
Till then we wanted the dp_connector to read the EDID and get the modes.
So this was actually intended to happen till the point where we moved to
panel-eDP to get the modes.
Hence what you have mentioned in your cover letter is right that the
chain was broken but there was no loss of functionality due to that today.
Now that these changes are made, we can still goto panel-eDP file for
the modes because of the below change from Sankeerth where the mode is
hard-coded:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/473431/
With this change cherry-picked it should work for kuogee. We will
re-test that with this change.
Your commit text was mentioning about DP.
For DP, for each controller in the catalog, we will call modeset_init()
which should skip this part for DP
if (dp_display->panel_bridge) {
ret = drm_bridge_attach(dp_display->encoder,
dp_display->panel_bridge, NULL,
as you see, NULL is incorrect. It should be a pointer to dp_bridge instead
DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
if (ret < 0) {
DRM_ERROR("failed to attach panel bridge: %d\n", ret);
return ERR_PTR(ret);
}
}
Followed by calling msm_dp_bridge_init() which will actually attach the
bridge:
drm_bridge_attach(encoder, bridge, NULL, DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
And this bridge should be attached before the external bridge.
Now, even for 3 DP controllers, this shall be true as there will be 3
separate encoders and 3 dp_displays and hence 3 drm_bridges.
What am i missing here?
So what are we achieving with this change?
Fixes: 8a3b4c17f863 ("drm/msm/dp: employ bridge mechanism for display
enable and disable")
Cc: Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c | 21 +++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
index d4d360d19eba..26ef41a4c1b6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
@@ -169,16 +169,6 @@ struct drm_connector
*dp_drm_connector_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display)
drm_connector_attach_encoder(connector, dp_display->encoder);
- if (dp_display->panel_bridge) {
- ret = drm_bridge_attach(dp_display->encoder,
- dp_display->panel_bridge, NULL,
- DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
- if (ret < 0) {
- DRM_ERROR("failed to attach panel bridge:
%d\n", ret);
- return ERR_PTR(ret);
- }
- }
-
return connector;
}
@@ -246,5 +236,16 @@ struct drm_bridge *msm_dp_bridge_init(struct
msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_devi
return ERR_PTR(rc);
}
+ if (dp_display->panel_bridge) {
+ rc = drm_bridge_attach(dp_display->encoder,
+ dp_display->panel_bridge,
bridge,
+ DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
+ if (rc < 0) {
+ DRM_ERROR("failed to attach panel bridge:
%d\n", rc);
+ drm_bridge_remove(bridge);
+ return ERR_PTR(rc);
+ }
+ }
+
return bridge;
Not a problem with this patch, but what is this pointer used for? I see
it's assigned to priv->bridges and num_bridges is incremented but nobody
seems to look at that.
That's on my todo list. to remove connectors array and to destroy
created bridges during drm device destruction.
