On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:20:29AM +0000, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 5:14 AM David Weinehall < > david.weinehall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 12:50:51PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > a long time ago I had agreed with Daniel that we would only add new > > > platforms after it was enabled by default on previous platforms. > > > a big reason for that is that we was willing to reduce the platforms > > > to validate and do better validation one by one before enabling. > > > > > > However now I believe it would be beneficial to have that supported > > > added so we can get more brave people using in different platforms so > > > we could capture more corner cases before we enable it by default. > > > Also we can still enable by default one platform at time if needed. > > > > > > So: > > > > > > Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > I also checked the spec to see if there was anything else new or > > > different for these platforms and didn't find anything so: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > But let's wait a bit to merge to give Daniel or others a time to nack ;) > > > > An update: while testing revealed that our BXT-P RVP doesn't work with > > PSR, the GLK definitely does. CI would like to do PSR testing on GLK, > > which obviously isn't possible if PSR is reported as unsupported on GLK. > > > > Based on BSpec alone the PSR failure on BXT-P shouldn't be a > > Broxton/Apollo Lake issue, but rather an issue with the RVP board > > (or the panel), so I'd say that this patch still makes sense. > > > It would be very important if we could narrow down the issue on BXT. > Panel?! Bios?! Missing Workaround? Different user space? Agreed. I haven't been able to find any newer BIOS for that device, the user space should be the same. Missing workaround might well be the case, and the panel is definitely not the same as the one the GLK has. We have several other panels that could be tested with though. > One of the biggest problem with PSR is that when it works well in all > machines we have and we enable it we end up finding someone in the > community with a machine that does not work well. "Luckily" I own one of those machines :P > We have an opportunity to investigate and understand very well what > are the issues on this BXT. We shouldn't loose track of it. That opportunity is now rapidly fleeing, since the HW in question is a BXT B0, for which the "drop workarounds" patch series has already been submitted and gotten a R-B. > And maybe adding that to CI we will be forced to record the bug! ;) > > > > > After all it only changes gen9lp to report that they *can* support PSR > > (thus allowing for testing of PSR on such platforms), it doesn't enable > > it by default. > > > > So I'd like to nudge once more that this patch be merged. > > I agree. Let's add it. Also good to enable on CNL as well. If the panel > that you have there on CNL that is on CI doesn't support it you are about > to recurve some panels that does support PSR2. Yeah, enabling on CNL too makes sense and getting systematic PSR2 testing would be awesome. "recurve" => "receive"? Kind regards, David _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
