Re: [PATCH 3/3] OMAPDSS: HDMI: Cache EDID

From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
Cc: Andy Green <andy.green@linaro.org>,
	mythripk@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, n-dechesne@ti.com,
	patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] OMAPDSS: HDMI: Cache EDID
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:32:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJe_ZhceO8TabHVZZ7BLqYE-EAhtSJxzwWv8eA7KfffSK_dxXQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJe_Zhdnc8TOY8hDiuZfjto9fTWnT8piGpjczApzfLVMnCcE7w@mail.gmail.com>

On 28 June 2012 21:18, Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 28 June 2012 20:57, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> wrote:

>>> > By the way, when the device is in system suspend, we surely won't detect
>>> > the HPD even if we kept the HPD always enabled. So there we'll miss the
>>> > HPD interrupt anyway, and the EDID cache would be invalid.
>>> >
>>> If omapdss already handles the possibility of display changed during
>>> suspend, I think we should be good :)
>>
>> Hmm I'm not sure I understand what you mean. I was referring to your
>> patch, which invalidated the EDID cache only on HPD interrupt when the
>> cable is unplugged. And we'd miss that interrupt when the board is in
>> system suspend, even if we otherwise kept the HPD interrupt always
>> enabled.
>>
> I meant before stale-edid, we face potential problem of omapdss
> behaving badly to the displays switched during suspend ?
>
OK, I think I get now what you mean. We do need to invalidate
edid-cache in the suspend path, irrespective of how omapdss behaves.

Thanks.