Hi Maxime
On 9/10/2024 1:40 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 12:59:47PM GMT, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 9/9/2024 6:37 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 03:11:24PM GMT, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
In certain use-cases, a CRTC could switch between two encoders
and because the mode being programmed on the CRTC remains
the same during this switch, the CRTC's mode_changed remains false.
In such cases, the encoder's mode_set also gets skipped.
Skipping mode_set on the encoder for such cases could cause an issue
because even though the same CRTC mode was being used, the encoder
type could have changed like the CRTC could have switched from a
real time encoder to a writeback encoder OR vice-versa.
Allow encoder's mode_set to happen even when connectors changed on a
CRTC and not just when the mode changed.
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
The patch and rationale looks sane to me, but we should really add kunit
tests for that scenarii.
Thanks for the review.
We have a IGT for recreating this scenario and thats how this issue was
captured
kms_writeback --run-subtest writeback-check-output -c <primary display mode>
We had added an option ( 'c' - custom mode) a couple of yrs ago to allow
writeback to be tested using any mode the user passes in (https://lore.kernel.org/r/all/YuJhGkkxah9U6FGx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/)
If we pass in the same resolution as the primary RT display, this scenario
always happens as the CRTC switches between RT encoder and WB encoder. Hope
that addresses some of the concern.
Unless it can easily be run in some sort of CI loop by anyone
contributing to that part of the kernel, it doesn't.
Don't get me wrong, it's a great feature, but it doesn't help making
sure that issue never creeps back in.
Ack, I understand.
Regarding KUnit tests, I have a couple of questions:
1) This is more of a run-time scenario where CRTC switch happens, does this
qualify for a KUnit or perhaps I am missing something.
We've been using kunit to perform integration tests in the kernel too,
so I would say that it definitely qualifies.
2) Is there any existing KUnit test file under drm/tests for validating
drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_disables() /
drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_enables() path because this will fall under
that bucket. I didnt find any matching case where we can extend this.
We don't have that at the moment, but we shouldn't be too far off. The
HDMI framework I contributed some months ago for example has all the
mode checking infrastructure in kunit. So you already have some way to
create a driver, a new state, modify that state and check it.
The only thing missing in your case is being able to commit it and check
that it has run, which shouldn't be too hard
Maxime
Alright. Yes I reviewed the hdmi infrastructure tests and you seem to
have most of the pieces. I just need to find some cycles to work on this
:) so you can have my name down for it and either me one of our team
members or perhaps with some help from other msm developers we can get
it added.
The reason I was hoping to get this reviewed and added as a "fix" was we
had already run into this scenario with kms_writeback test case and the
same scenario was seen in another msm bug
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/issues/59 leading to a null ptr
crash but we ended up fixing that within msm because that was a better
fix anyway so I was thinking this change would help to resolve these
types of issues for us once for all.
But if this needs to wait for the KUnit to be added, thats fine, we will
resend this one along with the KUnit once we work on it.
