On 2020-01-23 at 15:40:57 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 06:56:55PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > > display pipe system. > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > else > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > } > > } > > > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > > - > > The first and second hunks don't really have anything to do with > each other. Also the WARN_ON() should not be removed until all the > assumptions are fixed. True there can be other assumptions as well, there are few, i have come to know drm_handle_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in gen8_de_irq_handler() drm_wait_one_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in intel_wait_for_vblank(), i will fix these assumptions is next update, are there any other similar kind of assumption on which u can throw some light to look for? I am not sure how does above WARN_ON helps to know all such kind of assumptions, but it make sense to have it with FIXME. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta. > > > return 0; > > > > fail: > > -- > > 2.24.0 > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
