On Sat, 09 Sep 2017, "Pandiyan, Dhinakaran" <dhinakaran.pandiyan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 14:17 -0700, Radhakrishna Sripada wrote: >> Some platforms donot support PSR and DRRS simultaneously. > > I could not verify which platforms support PSR + DRRS and which don't. > But, seems safe to have DRRS disabled for all platforms when PSR is > enabled. > > > >> Visual artifacts and flickering were reported on BDW HP Spectre >> x360 Convertible. Deferring to PSR when both PSR and DRRS are >> supported by the panel. >> >> V2: Minor code-style changes suggested by Rodrigo >> >> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101111 >> Cc: Nicholas Stommel <nicholas.stommel@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Clinton Taylor <clinton.a.taylor@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Radhakrishna Sripada <radhakrishna.sripada@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 10 +++++----- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c >> index 887953c0f495..aa5a69301257 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c >> @@ -5467,11 +5467,6 @@ static void intel_dp_set_drrs_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, >> return; >> } >> >> - /* >> - * FIXME: This needs proper synchronization with psr state for some >> - * platforms that cannot have PSR and DRRS enabled at the same time. >> - */ >> - >> dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp); >> encoder = &dig_port->base; >> intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(encoder->base.crtc); >> @@ -5555,6 +5550,11 @@ void intel_edp_drrs_enable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, >> return; >> } >> >> + if (dev_priv->psr.enabled) { >> + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR enabled. Disabling DRRS.\n"); >> + return; >> + } > > So every time a flush/invalidate happens, we end up taking the > drrs.mutex and then returning because dev_priv->drrs.dp is NULL. That > seems unnecessary. Have your considered drrs.type = DRRS_NOT_SUPPORTED? That would prevent DRRS testing by disabling PSR via module parameter. I think this is fine. Although the debug message is misleading; it's "not enabling DRRS", not "disabling DRRS". There's a difference. Side note, dev_priv->drrs.type is redundant and could be replaced with direct use of dev_priv->vbt.drrs_type. > And this solution relies on the ordering that psr_enable() is done > before drrs_enable(), we need a comment in enable_ddi to make a note of > that. A WARN_ON in psr_enable() if drrs is already enabled might work > too. I think a WARN_ON would be fine. BR, Jani. > > >> + >> mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drrs.mutex); >> if (WARN_ON(dev_priv->drrs.dp)) { >> DRM_ERROR("DRRS already enabled\n"); -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
