[PATCH] drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

[PATCH] drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

[vathsala nagaraju]

From: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>

PSR2 is supported from skl+.
So Limiting it to skl+.

Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
index 4bd5768..cbbdfd2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
@@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static void hsw_activate_psr1(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
 	I915_WRITE(EDP_PSR_CTL, val);
 }
 
-static void hsw_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
+static void skl_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
 {
 	struct intel_digital_port *dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
 	struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev;
@@ -516,7 +516,9 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
 	}
 
 	crtc_state->has_psr = true;
-	crtc_state->has_psr2 = intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp, crtc_state);
+	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 9)
+		crtc_state->has_psr2 = intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
+							       crtc_state);
 	DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Enabling PSR%s\n", crtc_state->has_psr2 ? "2" : "");
 }
 
@@ -534,7 +536,7 @@ static void intel_psr_activate(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
 
 	/* psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive.*/
 	if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled)
-		hsw_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
+		skl_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
 	else
 		hsw_activate_psr1(intel_dp);
 
-- 
1.9.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/47263/
State : failure

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4547 -> Patchwork_9774 =

== Summary - FAILURE ==

  Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_9774 absolutely need to be
  verified manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in Patchwork_9774, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/47263/revisions/1/mbox/

== Possible new issues ==

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_9774:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Possible regressions ====

    igt@drv_module_reload@basic-reload-inject:
      fi-hsw-4770r:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN

    igt@drv_selftest@live_objects:
      fi-cnl-psr:         NOTRUN -> DMESG-FAIL

    
== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9774 that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@drv_module_reload@basic-no-display:
      fi-cnl-psr:         NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#105395) +5

    igt@drv_selftest@live_workarounds:
      {fi-cfl-8109u}:     PASS -> DMESG-FAIL (fdo#107292)
      fi-cnl-psr:         NOTRUN -> DMESG-FAIL (fdo#107292)

    igt@gem_exec_nop@basic-series:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#105719)

    igt@gem_exec_suspend@basic-s3:
      {fi-skl-caroline}:  NOTRUN -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#104108)

    igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-dpms:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#106000) +1

    igt@kms_frontbuffer_tracking@basic:
      fi-hsw-peppy:       PASS -> DMESG-FAIL (fdo#102614, fdo#106103)

    {igt@kms_psr@cursor_plane_move}:
      fi-cnl-psr:         NOTRUN -> DMESG-FAIL (fdo#107372) +1

    {igt@kms_psr@primary_mmap_gtt}:
      fi-cnl-psr:         NOTRUN -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#107372)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@drv_selftest@live_hangcheck:
      fi-bxt-dsi:         DMESG-FAIL (fdo#106560) -> PASS

    igt@gem_exec_create@basic:
      fi-glk-j4005:       DMESG-WARN (fdo#106745) -> PASS

    igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-modeset:
      fi-glk-j4005:       DMESG-WARN (fdo#106000) -> PASS

    
  {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when computing
          the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).

  fdo#102614 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102614
  fdo#104108 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104108
  fdo#105395 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105395
  fdo#105719 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105719
  fdo#106000 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106000
  fdo#106103 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106103
  fdo#106560 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106560
  fdo#106745 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106745
  fdo#107292 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107292
  fdo#107372 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107372


== Participating hosts (48 -> 44) ==

  Additional (3): fi-byt-j1900 fi-skl-caroline fi-cnl-psr 
  Missing    (7): fi-ilk-m540 fi-hsw-4200u fi-byt-squawks fi-bsw-cyan fi-ctg-p8600 fi-kbl-8809g fi-byt-clapper 


== Build changes ==

    * Linux: CI_DRM_4547 -> Patchwork_9774

  CI_DRM_4547: 0a7ab192a697e951b2404f3c1ce42c5fa74f9ed1 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGT_4575: fe908a01012c9daafafb3410b9407725ca9d4f21 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools
  Patchwork_9774: c91aef1b49bc639b95c2e0a1212fd2d0844c1e66 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux


== Linux commits ==

c91aef1b49bc drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9774/issues.html
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

[Dhinakaran Pandiyan]

On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 11:32 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> From: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>
> 
> PSR2 is supported from skl+.
> So Limiting it to skl+.

We restrict PSR2 to gen9+ in intel_psr_init_dpcd(), avoids a few extra
dpcd reads by checking early.


> 
> Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> index 4bd5768..cbbdfd2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static void hsw_activate_psr1(struct intel_dp
> *intel_dp)
>  	I915_WRITE(EDP_PSR_CTL, val);
>  }
>  
> -static void hsw_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> +static void skl_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)

Yeah, skl_ is appropriate here.

We should also change the function names to hsw_psr1_activate() and
skl_psr2_activate(), it has been annoying me that the activate
functions aren't named in the same fashion as psr_{enable, invalidate,
flush, disable}


>  {
>  	struct intel_digital_port *dig_port =
> dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
>  	struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev;
> @@ -516,7 +516,9 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp
> *intel_dp,
>  	}
>  
>  	crtc_state->has_psr = true;
> -	crtc_state->has_psr2 = intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
> crtc_state);
> +	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 9)
> +		crtc_state->has_psr2 =
> intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
> +							       crtc_
> state);
>  	DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Enabling PSR%s\n", crtc_state->has_psr2 ? "2"
> : "");
>  }
>  
> @@ -534,7 +536,7 @@ static void intel_psr_activate(struct intel_dp
> *intel_dp)
>  
>  	/* psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive.*/
>  	if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled)
> -		hsw_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
> +		skl_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
>  	else
>  		hsw_activate_psr1(intel_dp);
>  
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/psr: Limit psr2 to skl+

[Rodrigo Vivi]

1;5202;0cOn Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:47:21PM -0700, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 11:32 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> > From: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>
> > 
> > PSR2 is supported from skl+.
> > So Limiting it to skl+.
> 
> We restrict PSR2 to gen9+ in intel_psr_init_dpcd(), avoids a few extra
> dpcd reads by checking early.
> 
> 
> > 
> > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Vathsala Nagaraju <vathsala.nagaraju@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 8 +++++---
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> > index 4bd5768..cbbdfd2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c
> > @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ static void hsw_activate_psr1(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp)
> >  	I915_WRITE(EDP_PSR_CTL, val);
> >  }
> >  
> > -static void hsw_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> > +static void skl_activate_psr2(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> 
> Yeah, skl_ is appropriate here.
> 
> We should also change the function names to hsw_psr1_activate() and
> skl_psr2_activate(), it has been annoying me that the activate
> functions aren't named in the same fashion as psr_{enable, invalidate,
> flush, disable}

maybe simply  intel_psr1_activate intel_psr2_activate?!

> 
> 
> >  {
> >  	struct intel_digital_port *dig_port =
> > dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
> >  	struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev;
> > @@ -516,7 +516,9 @@ void intel_psr_compute_config(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp,
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	crtc_state->has_psr = true;
> > -	crtc_state->has_psr2 = intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
> > crtc_state);
> > +	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) >= 9)
> > +		crtc_state->has_psr2 =
> > intel_psr2_config_valid(intel_dp,
> > +							       crtc_
> > state);
> >  	DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Enabling PSR%s\n", crtc_state->has_psr2 ? "2"
> > : "");
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -534,7 +536,7 @@ static void intel_psr_activate(struct intel_dp
> > *intel_dp)
> >  
> >  	/* psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive.*/
> >  	if (dev_priv->psr.psr2_enabled)
> > -		hsw_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
> > +		skl_activate_psr2(intel_dp);
> >  	else
> >  		hsw_activate_psr1(intel_dp);
> >  
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx