| Message ID | 20191029111006.358963-1-thierry.reding@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/dp: Increase link status size | expand |
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > > The current link status contains bytes 0x202 through 0x207, but we also > want to make sure to include the DP_ADJUST_REQUEST_POST_CURSOR2 (0x20c) > so that the post-cursor adjustment can be queried during link training. We don't currently use this in i915 (we probably should), so the impact here is that we'll just read more DPCD than before. I quickly perused i915, and this does not appear to directly break anything. I think the change is probably fine, but at the same time it freaks me out a bit... If you don't mind, please resend this with Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org to have our CI crunch through it across a number of platforms. Would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. :) With the caveat that I didn't look at any other drivers besides i915, Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> > > Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot@chromium.org> > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1487366 ("Memory - corruptions") > Fixes: 79465e0ffeb9 ("drm/dp: Add helper to get post-cursor adjustments") > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > --- > I vaguely recall once carrying a patch to do this, but I can't find any > trace of it. > > include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > index 51ecb5112ef8..9581dec900ba 100644 > --- a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > +++ b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ > #define DP_MST_PHYSICAL_PORT_0 0 > #define DP_MST_LOGICAL_PORT_0 8 > > -#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 6 > +#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 11 > bool drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE], > int lane_count); > bool drm_dp_clock_recovery_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE],
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:32:41PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > > > > The current link status contains bytes 0x202 through 0x207, but we also > > want to make sure to include the DP_ADJUST_REQUEST_POST_CURSOR2 (0x20c) > > so that the post-cursor adjustment can be queried during link training. > > We don't currently use this in i915 (we probably should), so the impact > here is that we'll just read more DPCD than before. I quickly perused > i915, and this does not appear to directly break anything. I think the > change is probably fine, but at the same time it freaks me out a bit... > > If you don't mind, please resend this with Cc: > intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org to have our CI crunch through it across > a number of platforms. Would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. :) > > With the caveat that I didn't look at any other drivers besides i915, > > Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> Done, thanks. Thierry
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:32:41PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > > > > The current link status contains bytes 0x202 through 0x207, but we also > > want to make sure to include the DP_ADJUST_REQUEST_POST_CURSOR2 (0x20c) > > so that the post-cursor adjustment can be queried during link training. > > We don't currently use this in i915 (we probably should) IIRC post cursor2 is already deprecated. > , so the impact > here is that we'll just read more DPCD than before. I quickly perused > i915, and this does not appear to directly break anything. I think the > change is probably fine, but at the same time it freaks me out a bit... > > If you don't mind, please resend this with Cc: > intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org to have our CI crunch through it across > a number of platforms. Would give me a warm fuzzy feeling. :) > > With the caveat that I didn't look at any other drivers besides i915, > > Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> > > > > > > Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot@chromium.org> > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1487366 ("Memory - corruptions") > > Fixes: 79465e0ffeb9 ("drm/dp: Add helper to get post-cursor adjustments") > > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > > --- > > I vaguely recall once carrying a patch to do this, but I can't find any > > trace of it. > > > > include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > > index 51ecb5112ef8..9581dec900ba 100644 > > --- a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > > @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ > > #define DP_MST_PHYSICAL_PORT_0 0 > > #define DP_MST_LOGICAL_PORT_0 8 > > > > -#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 6 > > +#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 11 > > bool drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE], > > int lane_count); > > bool drm_dp_clock_recovery_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE], > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Reviewed-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com> On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 12:10 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > > The current link status contains bytes 0x202 through 0x207, but we also > want to make sure to include the DP_ADJUST_REQUEST_POST_CURSOR2 (0x20c) > so that the post-cursor adjustment can be queried during link training. > > Reported-by: coverity-bot <keescook+coverity-bot@chromium.org> > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1487366 ("Memory - corruptions") > Fixes: 79465e0ffeb9 ("drm/dp: Add helper to get post-cursor adjustments") > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com> > --- > I vaguely recall once carrying a patch to do this, but I can't find any > trace of it. > > include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > index 51ecb5112ef8..9581dec900ba 100644 > --- a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > +++ b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h > @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ > #define DP_MST_PHYSICAL_PORT_0 0 > #define DP_MST_LOGICAL_PORT_0 8 > > -#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 6 > +#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 11 > bool drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE], > int lane_count); > bool drm_dp_clock_recovery_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE],
diff --git a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h index 51ecb5112ef8..9581dec900ba 100644 --- a/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h +++ b/include/drm/drm_dp_helper.h @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ #define DP_MST_PHYSICAL_PORT_0 0 #define DP_MST_LOGICAL_PORT_0 8 -#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 6 +#define DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE 11 bool drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE], int lane_count); bool drm_dp_clock_recovery_ok(const u8 link_status[DP_LINK_STATUS_SIZE],