Hi Enric.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:15:26AM +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> The get_edid() callback can be triggered anytime by an ioctl, i.e
>
> drm_mode_getconnector (ioctl)
> -> drm_helper_probe_single_connector_modes
> -> drm_bridge_connector_get_modes
> -> ps8640_bridge_get_edid
>
> Actually if the bridge pre_enable() function was not called before
> get_edid(), the driver will not be able to get the EDID properly and
> display will not work until a second get_edid() call is issued and if
> pre_enable() is called before. The side effect of this, for example, is
> that you see anything when `Frecon` starts, neither the splash screen,
> until the graphical session manager starts.
>
> To fix this we need to make sure that all we need is enabled before
> reading the EDID. This means the following:
>
> 1. If get_edid() is called before having the device powered we need to
> power on the device. In such case, the driver will power off again the
> device.
>
> 2. If get_edid() is called after having the device powered, all should
> just work. We added a powered flag in order to avoid recurrent calls
> to ps8640_bridge_poweron() and unneeded delays.
>
> 3. This seems to be specific for this device, but we need to make sure
> the panel is powered on before do a power on cycle on this device.
> Otherwise the device fails to retrieve the EDID.
>
> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balle...@collabora.com>
> ---
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Use drm_bridge_chain_pre_enable/post_disable() helpers (Sam Ravnborg)
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/parade-ps8640.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/parade-ps8640.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/parade-ps8640.c
> index 9f7b7a9c53c5..c5d76e209bda 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/parade-ps8640.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/parade-ps8640.c
> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ struct ps8640 {
> struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[2];
> struct gpio_desc *gpio_reset;
> struct gpio_desc *gpio_powerdown;
> + bool powered;
> };
>
> static inline struct ps8640 *bridge_to_ps8640(struct drm_bridge *e)
> @@ -91,13 +92,15 @@ static int ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(struct ps8640
> *ps_bridge,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static void ps8640_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +static void ps8640_bridge_poweron(struct ps8640 *ps_bridge)
> {
> - struct ps8640 *ps_bridge = bridge_to_ps8640(bridge);
> struct i2c_client *client = ps_bridge->page[PAGE2_TOP_CNTL];
> unsigned long timeout;
> int ret, status;
>
> + if (ps_bridge->powered)
> + return;
> +
> ret = regulator_bulk_enable(ARRAY_SIZE(ps_bridge->supplies),
> ps_bridge->supplies);
> if (ret < 0) {
> @@ -164,6 +167,8 @@ static void ps8640_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> goto err_regulators_disable;
> }
>
> + ps_bridge->powered = true;
> +
> return;
>
> err_regulators_disable:
> @@ -171,12 +176,12 @@ static void ps8640_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> ps_bridge->supplies);
> }
>
> -static void ps8640_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +static void ps8640_bridge_poweroff(struct ps8640 *ps_bridge)
> {
> - struct ps8640 *ps_bridge = bridge_to_ps8640(bridge);
> int ret;
>
> - ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(ps_bridge, DISABLE);
> + if (!ps_bridge->powered)
> + return;
>
> gpiod_set_value(ps_bridge->gpio_reset, 1);
> gpiod_set_value(ps_bridge->gpio_powerdown, 1);
> @@ -184,6 +189,28 @@ static void ps8640_post_disable(struct drm_bridge
> *bridge)
> ps_bridge->supplies);
> if (ret < 0)
> DRM_ERROR("cannot disable regulators %d\n", ret);
> +
> + ps_bridge->powered = false;
> +}
> +
> +static void ps8640_pre_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +{
> + struct ps8640 *ps_bridge = bridge_to_ps8640(bridge);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ps8640_bridge_poweron(ps_bridge);
> +
> + ret = ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(ps_bridge, DISABLE);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + ps8640_bridge_poweroff(ps_bridge);
> +}
The impleimentation of ps8640_bridge_poweron() versus
ps8640_bridge_poweroff() is confusing.
ps8640_bridge_poweron() includes ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(.., ENABLE),
but ps8640_bridge_poweroff() does not include
ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(..., DISABLE).
This is inconsistent and confusing. At least it was for me when
reviewing. Can this be improved - or maybe just use naming that does not
indicate they are the reverse of each other?
> +
> +static void ps8640_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> +{
> + struct ps8640 *ps_bridge = bridge_to_ps8640(bridge);
> +
> + ps8640_bridge_vdo_control(ps_bridge, DISABLE);
> + ps8640_bridge_poweroff(ps_bridge);
> }
>
> static int ps8640_bridge_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> @@ -249,9 +276,34 @@ static struct edid *ps8640_bridge_get_edid(struct
> drm_bridge *bridge,
> struct drm_connector *connector)
> {
> struct ps8640 *ps_bridge = bridge_to_ps8640(bridge);
> + bool poweroff = !ps_bridge->powered;
> + struct edid *edid;
> +
> + /*
> + * When we end calling get_edid() triggered by an ioctl, i.e
> + *
> + * drm_mode_getconnector (ioctl)
> + * -> drm_helper_probe_single_connector_modes
> + * -> drm_bridge_connector_get_modes
> + * -> ps8640_bridge_get_edid
> + *
> + * We need to make sure that what we need is enabled before reading
> + * EDID, for this chip, we need to do a full poweron, otherwise it will
> + * fail.
> + */
> + drm_bridge_chain_pre_enable(bridge);
>
> - return drm_get_edid(connector,
> + edid = drm_get_edid(connector,
> ps_bridge->page[PAGE0_DP_CNTL]->adapter);
> +
> + /*
> + * If we call the get_edid() function without having enabled the chip
> + * before, return the chip to its original power state.
> + */
> + if (poweroff)
> + drm_bridge_chain_post_disable(bridge);
> +
> + return edid;
> }
The use of drm_bridge_chain_pre_enable() and
drm_bridge_chain_post_disable() was exactly what I was asking for -
looks good.
I have not really considered the idea from Balil that we should provide
better infrastructure support powering on the bridge chain when reading
the edid. Maybe an idea for later?
Sam
>
> static const struct drm_bridge_funcs ps8640_bridge_funcs = {
> --
> 2.28.0
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
