On Mon, 2018-08-20 at 10:15 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jul 2018, Rodrigo Vivi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Instead of using a backchannel if some dpcd read failed we > > can show that directly on debugfs output. > > > > We are not returning an error because we might still want > > to know if sub-sequent reads works, but we shouldn't > > need to check 2 places to see why reg is not on the list. > > Should we just nuke this debugfs and use the aux chardev interface to > dpcd instead?
Given that this debugfs does not print decoded information, I think, it offers very little benefit over direct reads. We also print some DPCD's in dmesg, so I'm in favour of killing it. Don't see the file being used in IGTs either. Your comment also reminds about the IGT tool that Tarun started writing for reading DPCD. -DK > > BR, > Jani. > > > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> > > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > index 59dc0610ea44..5d8da4e8c444 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > @@ -4846,8 +4846,8 @@ static int i915_dpcd_show(struct seq_file *m, > > void *data) > > > > err = drm_dp_dpcd_read(&intel_dp->aux, b->offset, > > buf, size); > > if (err <= 0) { > > - DRM_ERROR("dpcd read (%zu bytes at %u) > > failed (%zd)\n", > > - size, b->offset, err); > > + seq_printf(m, "dpcd read (%zu bytes at %u) > > failed (%zd)\n", > > + size, b->offset, err); > > continue; > > } > > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
