On 4/19/2026 8:29 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 06:32:29PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
On 4/15/2026 2:43 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 05:51:51PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
On 3/25/2026 3:30 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 09:04:24PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
On 8/27/2025 2:40 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 10:16:17PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote:
From: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
Add HPD callback for the MST module which shall be invoked from the
dp_display's HPD handler to perform MST specific operations in case
of HPD. In MST case, route the HPD messages to MST module.
Signed-off-by: Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yongxing Mou <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_mst_drm.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_mst_drm.h | 2 ++
3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
index
abcab3ed43b6da5ef898355cf9b7561cd9fe0404..59720e1ad4b1193e33a4fc6aad0c401eaf9cbec8
100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
@@ -500,9 +500,16 @@ static int msm_dp_display_handle_irq_hpd(struct
msm_dp_display_private *dp)
static int msm_dp_display_usbpd_attention_cb(struct device *dev)
{
- int rc = 0;
- u32 sink_request;
struct msm_dp_display_private *dp = dev_get_dp_display_private(dev);
+ struct msm_dp *msm_dp_display = &dp->msm_dp_display;
+ u32 sink_request;
+ int rc = 0;
+
+ if (msm_dp_display->mst_active) {
+ if (msm_dp_aux_is_link_connected(dp->aux) != ISR_DISCONNECTED)
+ msm_dp_mst_display_hpd_irq(&dp->msm_dp_display);
+ return 0;
+ }
/* check for any test request issued by sink */
rc = msm_dp_link_process_request(dp->link);
@@ -1129,8 +1136,10 @@ static irqreturn_t msm_dp_display_irq_thread(int irq,
void *dev_id)
if (hpd_isr_status & DP_DP_HPD_UNPLUG_INT_MASK)
msm_dp_display_send_hpd_notification(dp, false);
- if (hpd_isr_status & DP_DP_IRQ_HPD_INT_MASK)
+ if (hpd_isr_status & DP_DP_IRQ_HPD_INT_MASK) {
msm_dp_display_send_hpd_notification(dp, true);
+ msm_dp_irq_hpd_handle(dp, 0);
Why is it a part of this patch?? It has nothing to do with MST.
Emm ... maybe here we can directly call msm_dp_mst_display_hpd_irq..
I tried an alternative approach by calling the MST IRQ handler from
msm_dp_bridge_hpd_notify(). I expected that when hpd_isr_status ==
DP_DP_IRQ_HPD_INT_MASK, the hpd_link_status read in
msm_dp_bridge_hpd_notify() would be ISR_IRQ_HPD_PULSE_COUNT. That way, we
could handle both SST and MST interrupt paths in msm_dp_irq_hpd_handle().
However, hpd_link_status only reports ISR_CONNECTED. So I had to move the
MST IRQ handling into the IRQ thread. Do you have any suggestions on this?
When are the link status bits updated? Please remember, we need to
support all three cases:
- Native DP, native DP HPD pin handling
- Native DP, DP HPD pin not handled by the controller
- DP AltMode, DP HPD pin not used at all
In the second and the third cases we will not be getting the IRQs.
Instead one of the next bridges (connector, EC, AltMode, etc.) will send
the HPD event, which lands in the .hpd_notify() callback.
I added some logs and did some testing. I think
msm_dp_aux_is_link_connected() only shows the current HPD state. Since IRQ
HPD Pulse Count is very short, by the time we read REG_DP_DP_HPD_INT_STATUS
in the IRQ flow, the HPD state machine has usually already finished pulse
classification and returned to Connected.
But the IRQ should be sticky and it should be readable from the status
bits.
Yes... I’m not sure how this is handled on other platforms, but on LeMans
can not get IRQ status from msm_dp_aux_is_link_connected().
Can we clarify that somehow? Maybe with the hardware team if it is
uncear from the HPG?
Note, in the USB-C AltMode case the HPD machine is not used at all.
Because of that, the condition hpd_link_status == ISR_IRQ_HPD_PULSE_COUNT
will usually not be hit.
do you have any suggestion that in how to distinguish between an IRQ event
and a plug event in .hpd_notify() better? We probably don’t want to
introduce another state machine.
Then, I assume, currently there is no way to actually distinguish those.
The easiest way to handle the replug would be to store the current
"connected" status and verify if we are receiving "connected" while
being connected or if it is a disconnected -> connected change.
Emm.. Currently, regardless of whether it is the native DP HPD (on LeMans)
or DP over Type‑C Alt Mode(test on Hamoa), a single plug event always
results in two or more identical .hpd_notify() callbacks.
Could you please check, why? On Hamoa it might be because of the LTTPRs.
In other words, after the transition from disconnected → connected is
completed, there is still one more .hpd_notify() with connected → connected.
So it still can store "connected" to distinguish between an IRQ event and a
plug event from .hpd_notify()?
I've sent a series, which explicitly tracks the IRQ events. Hope that
helps.
Very thanks for sending the HPD IRQ series
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/151522/. it very helpful for
TYPE-C MST.
I’ve been testing it locally based on HPD refator series, and TYPE-C
basic plug case works on my side (although with some local modify, maybe
now it is workaround). At least the IRQ is being delivered correctly now
and the simplest case works. It still need to do some additional testing.
There is a small question:
When do you plan to merge the HPD refactor series? and could you please
rebase the irq series patch to HPD refactor series ? so that i can keep
MST depend on those 2 series.
Thoug storing of the "connected" state should help us to identify the
long HPD pulse (wich should be treated as unplug & replug).
This is my current understanding. If this is incorrect, please feel free to
correct me. Thanks.
As an additional note, msm_dp_hpd_plug_handle runs through its full flow
twice for a single plug event. Also, the behavior I described above does not
include any MST-specific filtering codes.
For a longer term (and granted that HDMI also has a notion of HPD pulse
events) we might want to extend the DRM HPD API to pass through the "IRQ
pulse" events as is (instead of converting those to
connected-whilec-connected events).
Let me sketch a draft for that.
