Re: [RFC] drm: Add utility function to check for edp1.4

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thanks for your comments Thierry.
I agree to all your comments.
I will write a general function to return version and repost the patch

Thanks,
Sonika

On Wednesday 29 October 2014 07:12 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:45:23AM +0530, sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx>

v2: Reading DP_EDP_REV, only when DISPLAY_CONTROL_CAPABLE field is set (Satheesh)

v3: Moving the utility function to drm_dp_helper (Daniel)

Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c |   15 +++++++++++++++
  include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h     |    2 ++
  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
index 08e33b8..a54a760 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
@@ -768,3 +768,18 @@ void drm_dp_aux_unregister(struct drm_dp_aux *aux)
  	i2c_del_adapter(&aux->ddc);
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dp_aux_unregister);
+
+bool drm_dp_is_edp_v1_4(struct drm_dp_aux *aux, const u8 dpcd[DP_RECEIVER_CAP_SIZE])
I'd prefer if this didn't take a dpcd argument but rather directly
accessed the DP_EDP_CONFIGURATION_CAP register so that it can be used
directly rather than rely on the driver to have read a dpcd block in the
appropriate format.

+{
+	uint8_t reg;
+
+	if (dpcd[DP_EDP_CONFIGURATION_CAP] &
+		 DP_DPCD_DISPLAY_CONTROL_CAPABLE) {
+
+		if (drm_dp_dpcd_read(aux, DP_EDP_REV, &reg, 1))
+			if (reg == 0x03)
+				return true;
+	}
+	return false;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dp_is_edp_v1_4);
Does it make sense to have a function that checks for a specific
version? Why not add one that returns the revision so that it can be
compared, something like:

	u8 value;

	drm_dp_dpcd_read(aux, DP_EDP_REV, &value, 1);

	return value;

Then we can do something like:

	#define DP_EDP_REV_1_1 0x00
	#define DP_EDP_REV_1_2 0x01
	#define DP_EDP_REV_1_3 0x02
	#define DP_EDP_REV_1_4 0x03

And code can simply compare against that:

	drm_dp_get_edp_revision(aux, &rev);

	if (rev >= DP_EDP_REV_1_4) {
		...
	}

The check in your variant will only match v1.4 exactly, but presumably
v1.5 will be backwards compatible. Having a direct check on the revision
code will allow code to continue to work with future, backwards-
compatible revisions.

diff --git a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h
index 8edeed0..b017e1e 100644
--- a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h
+++ b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h
@@ -102,6 +102,8 @@
#define DP_EDP_CONFIGURATION_CAP 0x00d /* XXX 1.2? */
  #define DP_TRAINING_AUX_RD_INTERVAL         0x00e   /* XXX 1.2? */
+#define DP_DPCD_DISPLAY_CONTROL_CAPABLE     (1 << 3)
This seems to be a field in the DP_EDP_CONFIGURATION_CAP register, so it
should be sorted below that register, not DP_TRAINING_AUX_RD_INTERVAL.

+#define DP_EDP_REV                          0x700
And this belongs further down, so it properly sorts into the list of
registers.

Thierry

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel





[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux