On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 06:51:48PM +0530, Shobhit Kumar wrote:
> During resume, while turning the EDP panel power on, we need not wait
> blindly for panel_power_cycle_delay. Check if panel power down sequence
> in progress and then only wait. This improves our resume time significantly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shobhit Kumar <shobhit.kumar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> index f335c92..10ec669 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> @@ -617,6 +617,20 @@ static bool edp_have_panel_power(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> return (I915_READ(_pp_stat_reg(intel_dp)) & PP_ON) != 0;
> }
>
> +static bool edp_panel_off_seq(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> +{
> + struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_held(&dev_priv->pps_mutex);
> +
> + if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev) &&
> + intel_dp->pps_pipe == INVALID_PIPE)
> + return false;
> +
> + return (I915_READ(_pp_stat_reg(intel_dp)) & PP_SEQUENCE_POWER_DOWN) != 0;
> +}
This doens't make sense to me. The power down cycle may have
completed just before, and so this would claim we don't have to
wait for the power_cycle_delay.
> +
> static bool edp_have_panel_vdd(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> {
> struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
> @@ -2025,7 +2039,8 @@ static void edp_panel_on(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> port_name(dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp)->port)))
> return;
>
> - wait_panel_power_cycle(intel_dp);
> + if (edp_panel_off_seq(intel_dp))
> + wait_panel_power_cycle(intel_dp);
>
> pp_ctrl_reg = _pp_ctrl_reg(intel_dp);
> pp = ironlake_get_pp_control(intel_dp);
> --
> 2.4.3
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
