On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 06:58:44AM +0000, Hogander, Jouni wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-04-05 at 00:34 +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Bigjoiner seem to be causing all kinds of grief to the PSR
> > code currently. I don't believe there is any hardware issue
> > but the code simply not handling this correctly. For now
> > just disable PSR when bigjoiner is needed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > index eef62983e9db..a3ff916b53f9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c
> > @@ -1584,6 +1584,17 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp,
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > + /*
> > + * FIXME figure out what is wrong with PSR+bigjoiner and
> > + * fix it. Presumably something related to the fact that
> > + * PSR is a transcoder level feature.
> > + */
> > + if (crtc_state->bigjoiner_pipes) {
> > + drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm,
> > + "PSR disabled due to bigjoiner\n");
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Are these problems with both PSR1 and PSR2?
I didn't look at he logs in that much detail.
It's now happening in CI because the bigjoiner force knob is
getting leaked to all kinds of tests. Eg. this might be one:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_14519/re-mtlp-1/igt@kms_busy@xxxxxxxxxx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
