On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 03:14:36PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 8/10/2015 5:07 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Reviewed-by: Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> On 8/10/2015 10:35 AM, Sonika Jindal wrote: > >>>> With HPD support added for all ports including PORT_A, setting hpd_pin will > >>>> result in enabling of hpd to edp as well. There is no need to enable HPD on > >>>> PORT_A hence this patch removes hpd_pin update for PORT_A, where edp will > >>>> be connected. it can be added back when required > >> What? You can't just go ahead and remove HPD from eDP sinks. > >> > >> BR, > >> Jani. > > Nope, we are not removing HPD for edp sinks, it was never there in the > > first place. It was > > enabled for CHV (even there by mistake since PORT B/C was both DP and > > eDP) but it was > > never there for any other plaforms nor is it used for any purpose (PSR > > must use it, but i > > dont see code for it as well). > > Are you saying there's no HPD enabled in our *hardware* for eDP? Or > driver? > > My point is, is this patch making it harder to enable eDP hpd handling > (e.g. for PSR or DP link re-training) in the future? We currently take > it into account in a few places, and if we start removing that, it will > be a loss of effort to first remove and then add it back. I have a branch with (untested) port A/E HPD support (+ a bunch of SPT+ irq handler reorganization). I guess I should post that in case people are interested in this stuff. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
