Bspec mentions 50 us for IO wake time and 32 us for fast wake time. 32 us
is most probably wrong as it doesn't meet the specification as fast wake
time is calculated in Bspec like this:
10..16 us (precharge) + 8 us (preamble) + 4 us (phy_wake) + 20 us
(tfw_exit_latency)
Instead of using these constants calculate IO wake and fast wake for
DISPLAY_VER < 12 as well.
v3:
- do not handle < 9 separately
- add own helper for skl and tgl io buffer wake times
v2:
- initialize io/fast_wake_time for display version < 9
Signed-off-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240313133221.868391-4-jouni.hogander@intel.com
Current fast and IO wake lines calculation is assuming fast wake sync
length is 18 pulses. Let's improve this by checking actual length.
Add getter for IO buffer wake time and return 10 us there which was assumed
with static 42 us IO wake time. Upcoming patches will extent this for
different display versions.
Bspec: 65450
v3:
- s/get_io_buffer_wake_time/io_buffer_wake_time/ and use it directly in
calculation.
v2:
- rename io_wake_time in if block to io_buffer_wake_time
- rename get_io_wake_time to get_io_buffer_wake_time
Signed-off-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240313133221.868391-3-jouni.hogander@intel.com
On HSW non-ULT (or at least on Dell Latitude E6540) external displays
start to flicker when we enable PSR on the eDP. We observe a much higher
SR and PC6 residency than should be possible with an external display,
and indeen much higher than what we observe with eDP disabled and
only the external display enabled. Looks like the hardware is somehow
ignoring the fact that the external display is active during PSR.
I wasn't able to redproduce this on my HSW ULT machine, or BDW.
So either there's something specific about this particular laptop
(eg. some unknown firmware thing) or the issue is limited to just
non-ULT HSW systems. All known registers that could affect this
look perfectly reasonable on the affected machine.
As a workaround let's unmask the LPSP event to prevent PSR entry
except while in LPSP mode (only pipe A + eDP active). This
will prevent PSR entry entirely when multiple pipes are active.
The one slight downside is that we now also prevent PSR entry
when driving eDP with pipe B or C, but I think that's a reasonable
tradeoff to avoid having to implement a more complex workaround.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 783d8b8087 ("drm/i915/psr: Re-enable PSR1 on hsw/bdw")
Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/10092
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240118212131.31868-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
MST connectors don't have a static attached encoder, as their encoder
can change depending on the pipe they use; so the encoder for an MST
connector can't be retrieved using intel_dp_attached_encoder() (which
may return NULL for MST). Most of the PSR debugfs entries depend on a
static connector -> encoder mapping which is only true for eDP and SST
DP connectors and not for MST. These debugfs entries were enabled for
MST connectors as well recently to provide PR information for them, but
handling MST connectors needs more changes.
Fix this by not adding for now the PSR entries on MST connectors. To
make things more uniform add the entries for SST connectors on all
platforms, not just on platforms supporting DP2.0.
v2:
- Keep adding the entries for SST connectors. (Jouni)
- Add a TODO: comment for MST support.
Fixes: ef75c25e8f ("drm/i915/panelreplay: Debugfs support for panel replay")
Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/9850
Cc: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com>
Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240103152609.2434100-1-imre.deak@intel.com
Use the >= and < operators for the DISPLAY_VER checks everywhere.
This is what most of the code does, but especially recently random
pieces of code have started doing this differently for no good reason.
Conversion done with the following cocci:
@find@
expression i915;
constant ver;
@@
(
DISPLAY_VER(i915) <= ver
|
DISPLAY_VER(i915) > ver
)
@script:python inc@
old_ver << find.ver;
new_ver;
@@
coccinelle.new_ver = str(int(old_ver) + 1)
@@
expression find.i915;
constant find.ver;
identifier inc.new_ver;
@@
(
- DISPLAY_VER(i915) <= ver
+ DISPLAY_VER(i915) < new_ver
|
- DISPLAY_VER(i915) > ver
+ DISPLAY_VER(i915) >= new_ver
)
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231127145028.4899-4-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Currently we are enabling selective fetch for all planes that are visible.
This is suboptimal as we might be fetching for memory for planes that are
not part of selective update.
Fix this by adding proper handling for disabling plane selective fetch:
If plane previously part of selective update is now not part of update:
Add it into updated planes and let the plane configuration to disable
selective fetch for it.
v3: Checkpatch warnings fixed
v2:
- Add setting sel_fetch_area->y1/y2 to -1
- Remove setting again local sel_fetch_area variable
Signed-off-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231120082606.3156488-3-jouni.hogander@intel.com
At least one TGL had regression when using u8 types
for entry setup frames calculation. So, let's switch
to use ints instead.
intel_psr_entry_setup_frames() function expects
to return u8 but since in case of error the error
code -ETIME is returned. This doesn't fit into u8
and hence the return value is not as expected.
Fixes: 2b981d57e4 ("drm/i915/display: Support PSR entry VSC packet to be transmitted one frame earlier")
Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231113093737.358137-1-mika.kahola@intel.com
TRANS_DP2_CTL register is programmed to enable panel replay from source
and sink is enabled through panel replay dpcd configuration address.
Bspec: 1407940617
v1: Initial version.
v2:
- Use pr_* flags instead psr_* flags. [Jouni]
- Remove intel_dp_is_edp check as edp1.5 also has panel replay. [Jouni]
v3: Cover letter updated and selective fetch condition check is added
before updating its bit in PSR2_MAN_TRK_CTL register. [Jouni]
v4: Selective fetch related PSR2_MAN_TRK_CTL programmming dropped. [Jouni]
v5: Added PSR2_MAN_TRK_CTL programming as needed for Continuous Full
Frame (CFF) update.
v6: Rebased on latest.
Note: Initial plan is to enable panel replay in full-screen live active
frame update mode. In a incremental approach panel replay will be enabled
in selctive update mode if there is any gap in curent implementation.
Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Cc: Arun R Murthy <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Arun R Murthy <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231108072303.3414118-6-animesh.manna@intel.com
Modify existing PSR implementation to enable panel replay feature of DP 2.0
which is similar to PSR feature of EDP panel. There is different DPCD
address to check panel capability compare to PSR and vsc sdp header
is different.
v1: Initial version.
v2:
- Set source_panel_replay_support flag under HAS_PANEL_REPLAY()
condition check. [Jouni]
- Code restructured around intel_panel_replay_init
and renamed to intel_panel_replay_init_dpcd. [Jouni]
- Remove the initial code modification around has_psr2 flag. [Jouni]
- Add CAN_PANEL_REPLAY() in intel_encoder_can_psr which is used to
enable in intel_psr_post_plane_update. [Jouni]
v3:
- Initialize both psr and panel-replay. [Jouni]
- Initialize both panel replay and psr if detected. [Jouni]
- Refactoring psr function by introducing _psr_compute_config(). [Jouni]
- Add check for !is_edp while deriving source_panel_replay_support. [Jouni]
- Enable panel replay dpcd initialization in a separate patch. [Jouni]
v4:
- HAS_PANEL_REPLAY() check not needed during sink capability check. [Jouni]
- Set either panel replay source support or psr. [Jouni]
v5:
- HAS_PANEL_REPLAY() removed and use HAS_DP20() instead. [Jouni]
- Move psr related code to intel_psr.c. [Jani]
- Reset sink_panel_replay_support flag during disconnection. [Jani]
v6: return statement restored which is removed by misatke. [Jouni]
v7: cosmetic changes. [Arun]
Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Cc: Arun R Murthy <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Arun R Murthy <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231108072303.3414118-4-animesh.manna@intel.com
Display driver shall read DPCD 00071h[3:1] during configuration
to get PSR setup time. This register provides the setup time
requirement on the VSC SDP entry packet. If setup time cannot be
met with the current timings
(e.g., PSR setup time + other blanking requirements > blanking time),
driver should enable sending VSC SDP one frame earlier before sending
the capture frame.
BSpec: 69895 (PSR Entry Setup Frames 17:16)
v2: Write frames before su entry to correct register (Ville, Jouni)
Move frames before su entry calculation to it's
own function (Ville, Jouni)
Rename PSR Entry Setup Frames register to indicate
Lunarlake specificity (Jouni)
v3: Modify setup entry frames calculation function to
return the actual frames (Ville)
Match comment with actual implementation (Jouni)
v4: Drop "set" from function naming (Jouni, Ville)
Use i915 instead of dev_priv (Jouni)
Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20231106114228.146574-1-mika.kahola@intel.com
Split out frontbuffer related declarations and static inlines from
gem/i915_gem_object.h into new gem/i915_gem_object_frontbuffer.h.
The main goal is to reduce header interdependencies. With
gem/i915_gem_object.h including display/intel_frontbuffer.h,
modification of the latter causes a whopping 300+ objects to be rebuilt,
while many of the source files actually needing it aren't explicitly
including it at all.
After the change, only 21 objects depend on display/intel_frontbuffer.h,
directly or indirectly.
Cc: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20230830085127.2416842-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
Stepping-specific display behavior shouldn't be tied to MTL as a
platform, but rather specifically to the Xe_LPD+ IP. Future non-MTL
platforms may re-use this IP and will need to follow the exact same
logic and apply the same workarounds. IS_MTL_DISPLAY_STEP() is dropped
in favor of a new macro IS_DISPLAY_IP_STEP() that only checks the
display IP version.
v2:
- Rename macro to IS_DISPLAY_IP_STEP for consistency with the
corresponding GT macro and handle steppings the same way.
v3:
- Drop the automatic "STEP_" pasting.
v4:
- Implement IS_DISPLAY_IP_STEP on top of IS_DISPLAY_IP_RANGE /
IS_DISPLAY_STEP building blocks and make the parameters from/until
instead of begin/fixed. (Jani)
- Fix usage details in comment.
v5:
- Tweak macro comment. (Gustavo)
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20230821180619.650007-17-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
hsw/bdw lack the pipe register vs. display register distinction
in their PSR masking capabilities. So to keep our CURSURFLIVE
tricks working we need to just unmask all display register writes
on these platforms. The downside being that any display regitster
(eg. even SWF regs) will cause a PSR exit.
Note that WaMaskMMIOWriteForPSR asks us to mask this on bdw, but
that won't work since we need those CURSURFLIVE tricks. Observations
on actual hardware show that this causes one extra PSR exit ~every
10 seconds, which is pretty much irrelevant. I suspect this is
due to the pcode poking at IPS_CTL. Disabling IPS does not stop it
however, so either I'm wrong or pcode pokes at the register
regardless of whether it's actually trying to enable/disable IPS.
Also when the machine is busy (eg. just running 'find /') these
extra PSR exits cease, which again points at pcode or some other
PM entity as being the culprit.
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20230609141404.12729-11-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
