[AMD Official Use Only - General] + Charlie Wang -----Original Message----- From: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2023 11:44 AM To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Hung, Alex <Alex.Hung@xxxxxxx>; dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Li, Sun peng (Leo) <Sunpeng.Li@xxxxxxx>; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Siqueira, Rodrigo <Rodrigo.Siqueira@xxxxxxx>; Wheeler, Daniel <Daniel.Wheeler@xxxxxxx>; Wu, Hersen <hersenxs.wu@xxxxxxx>; Chien, WenChieh (Jay) <WenChieh.Chien@xxxxxxx>; Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] drm/amd/display: stop using drm_edid_override_connector_update() On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 6:48 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Aug 2023, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Aug 2023, Alex Hung <alex.hung@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 2023-08-22 06:01, Jani Nikula wrote: > >>> Over the past years I've been trying to unify the override and > >>> firmware EDID handling as well as EDID property updates. It won't > >>> work if drivers do their own random things. > >> Let's check how to replace these references by appropriate ones or > >> fork the function as reverting these patches causes regressions. > > > > I think the fundamental problem you have is conflating connector > > forcing with EDID override. They're orthogonal. The .force callback > > has no business basing the decisions on connector->edid_override. > > Force is force, override is override. > > > > The driver isn't even supposed to know or care if the EDID > > originates from the firmware loader or override EDID debugfs. > > drm_get_edid() will handle that for you transparently. It'll return > > the EDID, and you shouldn't look at connector->edid_blob_ptr either. > > Using that will make future work in drm_edid.c harder. > > > > You can't fix that with minor tweaks. I think you'll be better off > > starting from scratch. > > > > Also, connector->edid_override is debugfs. You actually can change > > the behaviour. If your userspace, whatever it is, has been written > > to assume connector forcing if EDID override is set, you *do* have > > to fix that, and set both. > > Any updates on fixing this, or shall we proceed with the reverts? What is the goal of the reverts? I don't disagree that we may be using the interfaces wrong, but reverting them will regess functionality in the driver. Alex
