Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 09:43:59AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: >> Quoting Andy Lutomirski (2018-02-09 17:55:38) >> > On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:39 AM, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > > So, I move the hacked scheduled to 10s and forced psr_activate 10ms >> > > after that and the result is this: >> > > >> > > >> > > [ 11.757909] [drm:intel_psr_enable [i915]] *ERROR* I915-DEBUG: >> > > Scheduling 10s >> > > [ 11.778586] [drm:intel_psr_flush [i915]] *ERROR* I915-DEBUG: Work busy! >> > > ... >> > > a bunch more of Work busy >> > > ... >> > > [ 21.980643] [drm:intel_psr_flush [i915]] *ERROR* I915-DEBUG: Work busy! >> > >> > This like ("Work busy!") is intel_psr_flush() noticing that >> > work_busy() returns true (which it does indeed do when the work is >> > scheduled for the future). But this means that intel_psr_flush() >> > wants to keep PSR off for a little bit (10s with your patch applied) >> > because the screen isn't idle. >> > >> > > [ 21.983060] [drm:intel_psr_work [i915]] *ERROR* I915-DEBUG: Work running >> > >> > And here's intel_psr_work() turning PSR back on 3ms later. >> > >> > So I think you're seeing exactly the bug I described. > > Well, not in the way you described though. > > As we can see on the log work running get executed only 10 seconds after > intel_psr_enable wanted. None of the thousand flushes happening there will > trigger psr activate before the wanted 10s. > > So the hack indeed work as expected. > > Given that description I proved that it works as expected and move away. > But since you insisted I step back and re-read your patch like if you had > never mentioned the hack on intel_psr_enable ever, but only focusing > on the regular calls from intel_psr_flush and you are right, > we do have a bug that would affect VLV/CHV here. > > In the current code the psr_activate can happen any moment from 0ms to 100ms > after the flush. > > This 100ms would just reduce the amount of fast exit-activate cases, > but not eliminate the possibility of enabling before 100ms. > > On core platforms it shouldn't be any problem because HW tracking would > take care of waiting the extra idle frames. > > This could be a particular problem for VLV/CHV platforms where I believe > we should wait few frames before really activating it back. > > So, probably we can go ahead with your patch so we get this covered for > VLV/CHV, but I'd like a version without mentioning the intel_psr_enable > case that is already proven work as expected. > > But meanwhile I will check back on the hack and see if we can already > remove that since many things got fixed and improved around eDP link training > and psr itself. > > Also I will discuss with DK and check the possibility of a immediate activate > on platforms with HW tracking. Specially now that we are moving towards more > use of HW tracking. > > In this case we would reduce this scheduled/timer based solution only for VLV/CHV. > > And then on VLV/CHV front there are even more issues to sync with VBLANK etc in > a platform that probably went to the market without any single unit with PSR panels > that was to expensive when those platforms got released. > > I even consider totally removing VLV/CHV code completely. > >> >> It's also evident in the tests that PSR isn't being disabled as >> often/quick as we need for frontbuffer updates to be seen. > > Yeap, it is evident we have many bugs there, but I'm afraid this is not > the answer for the lag. > DK found some promising ones... Ok. I was wrong. This also explains and fixes some cases here like fbcon/fbdev... So: Tested-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> I'd still want a version without mention to the schedule case at intel_psr_enable to avoid confusion here. But since I'm now basing my patches on top of this: Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > >> -Chris > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx