Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019, 22:52:39 CET schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > On Thu, 2019-02-21 at 22:48 +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019, 17:38:25 CET schrieb Robert Foss: > > > On 2/21/19 4:53 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > > Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019, 16:46:19 CET schrieb Robert Foss: > > > > > On 2/21/19 2:26 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019, 11:27:15 CET schrieb Robert Foss: > > > > > > > Hey Heiko, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've just started booting the RK3399 based Radxa Rock Pi 4 on the mainline > > > > > > > kernel. Specifically on linux-rockchip/for-next, with an additional patch > > > > > > > adding the GPU DT node[1]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately I'm seeing an artifact on all display output[2]. > > > > > > > It, from the VT to 3D content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this an issue that has been encountered before? > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't seen something like this before. I do test graphics > > > > > > on most Rockchip socs regularly (right now dw-hdmi only > > > > > > on non-rk3399 socs though). > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you try full linux-next as well? My for-next branch obviously > > > > > > only carries dt/soc-driver stuff but not things like drm-misc. > > > > > > > > > > > > One possible issue might be the generated clocks. You could check > > > > > > $debug/clk/clk_summary for the dclk_vopX to see if that matches > > > > > > the suggested clock for the mode. (For example check the requested > > > > > > rate in rockchip_vop.c against what it actually gets). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had a look using the current linux-next/master, and I'm seeing the same results. > > > > > Commit: 550f4769c7c4 - Add linux-next specific files for 20190221 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had also look at the debugfs output: > > > > > # cat /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary | grep dclk_vop > > > > > dclk_vop0_div 0 1 0 27000000 0 0 50000 > > > > > dclk_vop0 0 2 0 27000000 0 0 50000 > > > > > dclk_vop0_frac 0 0 0 1350000 0 0 50000 > > > > > dclk_vop1_div 1 1 0 59400000 0 0 50000 > > > > > dclk_vop1 2 2 0 59400000 0 0 50000 > > > > > dclk_vop1_frac 0 0 0 2970000 0 0 50000 > > > > > > > > > > But I can't find a file named rockchip_vop.c exactly. And I'm not entirely sure > > > > > about how to decipher the expected values from the driver. > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip_drm_vop.c (my memory of the filename was faulty > > > > it seems). As for comparing to the expected rate, I guess the easiest > > > > way would be to just insert a printk into vop_crtc_mode_fixup() > > > > after the clk_round_rate call, outputting both the requested and > > > > calculated rate and then looking that up in the dmesg. > > > > > > dmesg: > > > vop_crtc_mode_fixup() mode->clock=65000000 adjusted_mode->clock=61538000 > > > > > > Is the adjusted clock withing the reasonable range? > > > > sadly, I have no real clue. I can cope with the hardware-centric parts like > > making encoders somehow work, but I'm way out of my depth when it comes > > to all this display-mode-voodoo. > > > > > > > > Additionally I've had a look at the libdrm modetest util, and it is reporting > > > far fewer modes than what I would expect on my 4k monitor. > > > > > > As an added note, I have this board+monitor working using proprietary drivers, > > > and up to 4k resolutions. > > > > non-standard resolutions are still a bit of a problem I think. > > The vendor kernel (and also the CrOS kernel) does contain quite a number > > of hacks to make that work. (hacking up plls and the clock-tree, making > > it quite non-generic). > > > > But yes, it seems that you only get 3 modes? That are way to few I think. > > My display at least manages to get its 1080p native resolution, but I'm > > also in the bind of having only this one display, so cannot really test > > the more non-standard (or higher resolution) stuff. > > > > Do you happen to have any other display you could attach to just compare > > what happens? > > > > > > FWIW, I have a Samsung (old?) TV, and on the same board as Robert's, > with the same kernel and rootfs, I don't have any issues. could you also take a look at the timing both requested and real clock rate? _______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list Linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
