On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:33:34AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:59:06AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > So I've been experimenting a bit with various dongles here, and sadly I've
> >> > not managed to get any one of them to return short reads :(
> >> >
> >> > I did find one that allows changing the speed of the i2c bus, but even if
> >> > I reduce it to 1khz there are no short reads, just a lot more defers. The
> >> > dongle in question has OUI 001cf8.
> >> >
> >> > However the good news is that EDID reads seem to get faster across the
> >> > board with 16 byte messages. How much faster depends on the dongle.
> >> >
> >> > Here are my measurements how long it took to read a single EDID block:
> >> > DP->DVI (OUI 001cf8): 40ms -> 35ms
> >> > DP->VGA (OUI 0022b9): 45ms -> 38ms
> >> > Zotac DP->2xHDMI: 25ms -> 4ms
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Oh and this is how I mangled my drm_dp_i2c_xfer():
> >> > transferred = 0;
> >> > while (msgs[i].len > transferred) {
> >> > msg.buffer = msgs[i].buf + transferred;
> >> > msg.size = min_t(unsigned int, drm_dp_i2c_msg_size,
> >> > msgs[i].len - transferred);
> >> > err = drm_dp_i2c_do_msg(aux, &msg);
> >> > if (err < 0)
> >> > break;
> >> > WARN_ON(err == 0);
> >> > transferred += err;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > I made the msg size configurable via a module param just to help me test
> >> > this stuff, but I'm thinking we might want to upstream that just to make
> >> > it easier to try smaller message sizes if/when people encounter problematic
> >> > sinks/dongles.
> >>
> >> How about just letting that happen first, to see if and how the problems
> >> occur? If there's a pattern, maybe we can fall back to 1-byte transfers
> >> in those cases (or even add OUI based quirks). I've grown really
> >> hesitant about adding new module parameters, they are ABI we can't
> >> easily remove/regress once added.
> >
> > module_param_debug takes care of any such risks imo.
>
> No such thing, maybe you mean module_param_unsafe?
Indeed that's what I've meant.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
