| Message ID | 20200123132659.725-3-anshuman.gupta@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | 3 display pipes combination system support | expand |
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 06:56:55PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > display pipe system. > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > else > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > } > } > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > - The first and second hunks don't really have anything to do with each other. Also the WARN_ON() should not be removed until all the assumptions are fixed. > return 0; > > fail: > -- > 2.24.0
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020, Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> wrote: > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > display pipe system. > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > else > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > } > } > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > - > return 0; > > fail:
On 2020-01-23 at 15:40:57 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 06:56:55PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > > display pipe system. > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > else > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > } > > } > > > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > > - > > The first and second hunks don't really have anything to do with > each other. Also the WARN_ON() should not be removed until all the > assumptions are fixed. True there can be other assumptions as well, there are few, i have come to know drm_handle_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in gen8_de_irq_handler() drm_wait_one_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in intel_wait_for_vblank(), i will fix these assumptions is next update, are there any other similar kind of assumption on which u can throw some light to look for? I am not sure how does above WARN_ON helps to know all such kind of assumptions, but it make sense to have it with FIXME. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta. > > > return 0; > > > > fail: > > -- > > 2.24.0 > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 05:32:01PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > On 2020-01-23 at 15:40:57 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 06:56:55PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > > > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > > > display pipe system. > > > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > > > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > else > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > > > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > > } > > > } > > > > > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > > > > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > > > > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > > > - > > > > The first and second hunks don't really have anything to do with > > each other. Also the WARN_ON() should not be removed until all the > > assumptions are fixed. > True there can be other assumptions as well, there are few, i have come to know > drm_handle_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in gen8_de_irq_handler() In fact it's in all irq handlers. > drm_wait_one_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in intel_wait_for_vblank(), Good catch. Totally forgot about these. > i will fix these assumptions is next update, are there any other similar kind of > assumption on which u can throw some light to look for? > I am not sure how does above WARN_ON helps to know all such kind of > assumptions, but it make sense to have it with FIXME. It doesn't help finding them, what it does is make people realize that they're running a driver which is known to be broken.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 03:35:20PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 05:32:01PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > On 2020-01-23 at 15:40:57 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 06:56:55PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > > we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in > > > > driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous > > > > display pipe system. > > > > > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > > > > @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > > > if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), > > > > "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > > else > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", > > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); > > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); > > > > > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), > > > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", > > > > @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, > > > > > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, > > > > "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", > > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, > > > > "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", > > > > - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); > > > > + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); > > > > } > > > > } > > > > > > > > @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) > > > > > > > > intel_color_init(crtc); > > > > > > > > - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); > > > > - > > > > > > The first and second hunks don't really have anything to do with > > > each other. Also the WARN_ON() should not be removed until all the > > > assumptions are fixed. > > True there can be other assumptions as well, there are few, i have come to know > > drm_handle_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in gen8_de_irq_handler() > > In fact it's in all irq handlers. > > > drm_wait_one_vblank(&dev_priv->drm, pipe) in intel_wait_for_vblank(), > > Good catch. Totally forgot about these. > > > i will fix these assumptions is next update, are there any other similar kind of > > assumption on which u can throw some light to look for? > > I am not sure how does above WARN_ON helps to know all such kind of > > assumptions, but it make sense to have it with FIXME. > > It doesn't help finding them, what it does is make people realize > that they're running a driver which is known to be broken. Just remembered another borked thing: trans_offsets[]. Some places use that to check if the transcoder is present, and we don't take fusing into account when filling that. Though looks like intel_display_capture_error_state() is the only place where can actually do the wrong thing (assuming EDP/DSI transcoders are never fused off).
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c index 878d331b9e8c..afd8d43160c6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c @@ -14070,11 +14070,11 @@ verify_single_dpll_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, if (new_crtc_state->hw.active) I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask), "pll active mismatch (expected pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); else I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask 0x%02x)\n", - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base)), pll->active_mask); + pipe_name(crtc->pipe), pll->active_mask); I915_STATE_WARN(!(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask), "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (expected 0x%x in 0x%02x)\n", @@ -14103,10 +14103,10 @@ verify_shared_dpll_state(struct intel_crtc *crtc, I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active_mask & crtc_mask, "pll active mismatch (didn't expect pipe %c in active mask)\n", - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); I915_STATE_WARN(pll->state.crtc_mask & crtc_mask, "pll enabled crtcs mismatch (found %x in enabled mask)\n", - pipe_name(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base))); + pipe_name(crtc->pipe)); } } @@ -16485,8 +16485,6 @@ static int intel_crtc_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, enum pipe pipe) intel_color_init(crtc); - WARN_ON(drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe); - return 0; fail:
we can't have (pipe == crtc->index) assumption in driver in order to support 3 non-contiguous display pipe system. Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)