On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 07:51:21PM -0800, Manasi Navare wrote: > Ville, > You mentioned that this detect_done should be set to false also > in the resume case so in i915_display_resume where it calls > intel_hpd_init that eventually schedules the hpd_poll_init_work and > calls drm_helper_hpd_irq_event() which then calls .detect(). > So in this case if I have to reset this detect_done in the > hpd_poll_init_work, how do I make sure I do it only if the > connector is DP? We have the .reset hook for these sort of things. > > Manasi > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 04:05:56PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 04:43:51PM -0800, Manasi Navare wrote: > > > The detect_done flag was introduced in the commit > > > 7d23e3c37bb3fc6952dc84007ee60cb533fd2d5c in order to avoid > > > multiple detects on hotplug where intel_dp_long_pulse() > > > was called from HPD handler as well as in intel_dp_detect. > > > So this detect_done flag was required to make sure intel_dp_detect() > > > did not call long pulse handler again if it was already been called > > > from HPD handler. However commit 1015811609c0328b5ed670d07748591b837e74eb > > > differs the long hpd handling entirely until the hotplug work runs to > > > avoid the double long hpd handling the "detect_done" flag is trying > > > to prevent. > > > > That sentence doesn't parse here. Anyways, the flag indeed is now a nop > > and your patch is pretty much the same what I did here: > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/101476/ > > > > > > > > So now we do not need to reset the detect_done flag to false in > > > intel_dp_detect. It will be reset in the intel_dp_hpd_pulse so > > > that intel_dp_detect does a full detect. However if the .detect > > > gets called during mode enumeration then we do not need to do a > > > full detect. This patch avoids the WARNS_ONS during connected boot > > > case when it calls intel_dp_check_link_status() due to multiple > > > detects > > > > How exactly does it do that? Also we shouldn't sweep that under the rug > > anyway. Instead someone should actually fix the problem that causes the > > WARN. > > > > > and also avoids DP compliance failures. It avoids doing > > > a full detect every single time on .detect(). > > > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 2 -- > > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > > > index db75bb9..9c9277e 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > > > @@ -4470,8 +4470,6 @@ static bool intel_digital_port_connected(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > > if (!intel_dp->detect_done) > > > status = intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector); > > > > > > - intel_dp->detect_done = false; > > > - > > > return status; > > > } > > > > > > -- > > > 1.9.1 > > > > -- > > Ville Syrjälä > > Intel OTC -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
