On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 16:33 +0200, Ander Conselvan De Oliveira wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 17:58 +0530, Shubhangi Shrivastava wrote:
> > Current DP detection has DPCD operations split across
> > intel_dp_hpd_pulse and intel_dp_detect which contains
> > duplicates as well. Also intel_dp_detect is called
> > during modes enumeration as well which will result
> > in multiple dpcd operations. So this patch tries
> > to solve both these by bringing all DPCD operations
> > in one single function and make intel_dp_detect
> > use existing values instead of repeating same steps.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sivakumar Thulasimani <sivakumar.thulasimani@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Shubhangi Shrivastava <shubhangi.shrivastava@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 19 ++++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > index a0fe827..4e74cd6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> > @@ -4881,7 +4881,8 @@ intel_dp_detect(struct drm_connector *connector, bool
> > force)
> > return connector_status_disconnected;
> > }
> >
> > - intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
> > + if (force)
> > + intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
> >
> > if (intel_connector->detect_edid)
> > return connector_status_connected;
> > @@ -5211,21 +5212,9 @@ intel_dp_hpd_pulse(struct intel_digital_port
> > *intel_dig_port, bool long_hpd)
> > /* indicate that we need to restart link training */
> > intel_dp->train_set_valid = false;
> >
> > - if (!intel_digital_port_connected(dev_priv, intel_dig_port))
> > - goto mst_fail;
> > + intel_dp_long_pulse(intel_dp->attached_connector);
> > + goto put_power;
This skips the line that sets ret to IRQ_HANDLED, which will cause the hotplug
code to "fall back to old school hpd".
Ander
> >
> > - if (!intel_dp_get_dpcd(intel_dp)) {
> > - goto mst_fail;
> > - }
>
> So we don't call this for eDP anymore on long pulse, which I assume is
> harmless
> since the bits we are reading from DPCD shouldn't change?
>
> > -
> > - intel_dp_probe_oui(intel_dp);
> > -
> > - if (!intel_dp_probe_mst(intel_dp)) {
> > - drm_modeset_lock(&dev
> > ->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL);
> > - intel_dp_check_link_status(intel_dp);
> > - drm_modeset_unlock(&dev
> > ->mode_config.connection_mutex);
> > - goto mst_fail;
> > - }
>
> Hmm, so this is where that hunk from patch 1 I said should be a separate patch
> comes from. Looks like in belongs to this patch.
>
> > } else {
> > if (intel_dp->is_mst) {
> > if (intel_dp_check_mst_status(intel_dp) == -EINVAL)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
