Hi,
On 28-02-19 10:15, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 04:45:32PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 27-02-19 12:16, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
One thing that this series does not consider is the DP lane count
problem. The GPU drivers (i915 in this case) does not know is four,
two or one DP lanes in use.
Also, orientation.
The orientation should simply be correct with Type-C over DP. The mux /
orientation-switch used will take care of (physically) swapping the
lanes if the connector is inserted upside-down.
I guess that is not a critical issue since there is a workaround (I
think) where the driver basically does trial and error, but ideally we
should be able to tell i915 also the pin assignment that was
negotiated with the partner device so it knows the DP lane count.
Yeah, if the information is there, we'd like to know.
So far machines actually using a setup where the kernel does the
USB-PD / Type-C negotiation rather then this being handled in firmware
in say the Alpine Ridge controller, are very rare.
AFAIK in the Alpine Ridge controller case, there is no communication
with the i915 driver, the only thing the Alpine Ridge controller does
which the everything done in the kernel approach does not, is that
it actually has a pin connected to the HDP pin of the displayport in
question. But that just lets the i915 driver know about hotplug-events,
not how many lanes are used.
Currently I'm aware of only 2 x86 models which actually need the
hotplug event propagation from the Type-C subsystem to the i915 driver.
Do we really want to come up with a much more complex solution to
optimize for this corner case, while the much more common case
(Alpine Ridge controller) does not provide this info to the i915 driver?
The HPD signal is often handled with a GPIO on Intel Platforms. Either
the PD controller or EC controller, after receiving the Attention
message, triggers the GPIO. On some systems though that GPIO method
could not be used, so instead a side channel communication is used:
the GFX device (so i915 driver) receives a specific custom interrupt.
Unfortunately it now appears that there may be products coming where
using the GPIO is not going to be possible, and also side channel
communication is going to be out of the question. I've started an
internal discussion inside Intel about the possibility to extend the
UCSI specification to be able to support that kind of products.
Alpine Ridge uses TI's Power Delivery controllers. The platforms that
have Alpine Ridge TBT controller(s) often expose the USB Type-C
connectors on them to the OS via UCSI, however, it appears the Alpine
Ridge actually allows direct access to the PD controllers from the OS.
That would mean we can supply the same information to the GPU drivers
that we will deliver on CHT also on every platform that uses Alpine
Ridge.
Ok.
To give some idea of the complexity, first of all we need some
mechanism to let the kernel know which drm_connector is connected
to which Type-C port. For the 2 models I know if which need this, this
info is not available and we would need to hardcode it in the kernel
based on e.g. DMI matching.
I've been thinking about this... Do we actually need to link the
correct drm_connector to the Type-C connector? Perhaps we can make
this work by just linking the GFX device to the Type-C connector.
What use is it to the kms driver if it gets an event there is a DP
hotplug with x lanes and orientation foo, if we are not telling it
on which DP port it is ? kms devices already have multiple DP ports
and more then one could be hooked-up to type-c connectors.
Then once we have this link, we need to start thinking about probe
ordering. Likely we need the typec framework to find the drm_connector,
since the typec-partner device is only created when there actually is
a DP capable "dongle" connected, making doing it the other way around
tricky. Then the typec-partner device needs to get a reference or some
such to make sure the drm_connector does not fgo away during the lifetime
of the typec-partner device.
No! We must not link the partner device with anything other than the
Type-C connector. We link the USB Type-C connector to the DisplayPort,
and we link the USB Type-C connector to the partner. The Type-C
connector is the proxy here.
Maybe, but even then we still need one side of the link to have a
reference on the other, having a proxy in between does not change
anything.
I would really like to avoid this, so if we want to send more info to
the i915 driver, I suggest we create some event struct for this which
gets passed to the notifier, this could include a string to
describe the DP connector which the Type-C connector is connected to
when the mux is set to DP mode, e.g. "i915/DP-1" should be unique
or probably better, use the PCI device name, so: "0000:00:02.0/DP-1"
Then we still have a loose coupling avoiding lifetime issues, while
the receiving drm driver can check which connector the event is for
and we can then also include other info such as lane-count and orientation
in the event struct.
Well, I don't think we can deny the GPU driver (in this case) the
information that we have and that is relevant to it, just because it
seems difficult to deliver that information to the right location.
Right, but this does not require a tight-coupling. My original
proposal can do this if we pass a data struct with an identifier
for the DP port for which the event is to the notifier. I suggest using
a string for identifier, something like: "0000:00:02.0/DP-1" this
event struct could then also contain all the info we want to pass.
I'm not sure we have checked all the options we have yet. Perhaps
there is a simpler way of doing this.
As a result of writing this patches I've been thinking that we really
have a need for some sort of in kernel event mechanism, think something
pub/sub ish, a bit like mqtt.
I'm thinking a global event-queue with an API like this:
struct kernel_event {
enum kernel_event_type type;
char source_id[32];
char dest_id[32];
union data {
kernel_event_type_foo foo;
kernel_event_type_bar bar;
};
}
Where drivers interested in events can then specify that they
only want events of a certain type and optionally also filter
on source / dest id.
Note that setting dest_id would be optional for event generators,
since not all event generators will know this.
Looking at all the extcon and power_supply notifications we
already have going on with the Type-C PD support, all using their
own private notifier solutions, I think something generic like this,
which does not depend on one device getting some sort of reference
on another device, might in the end be better.
This would also avoid a lot of PROBE_DEFER handling in various places,
which in some cases gets rather tricky wrt ordering.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
