> -----Original Message----- > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 3:29 PM > To: Kahola, Mika <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/lnl: Remove watchdog timers for PSR > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:42:10PM +0300, Mika Kahola wrote: > > Currently we are not using watchdog timers for PSR/PSR2. > > The patch disables these timers so they are not in use. > > I can't figure out what you're saying here. What bspec seems to be saying is > that the max_sleep thing got nuked from the hw so we > no longer need to mask it.
Well, my understanding was that we would need to remove these from the driver as these are irrelevant. > > > > > BSpec: 69895 > > > > Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 24 > > +++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c > > index 850b11f20285..13b58dceb2bf 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c > > @@ -672,11 +672,15 @@ static void hsw_activate_psr1(struct intel_dp > > *intel_dp) > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dp_to_i915(intel_dp); > > enum transcoder cpu_transcoder = intel_dp->psr.transcoder; > > u32 max_sleep_time = 0x1f; > > - u32 val = EDP_PSR_ENABLE; > > + u32 val = 0; > > > > - val |= EDP_PSR_IDLE_FRAMES(psr_compute_idle_frames(intel_dp)); > > > > - val |= EDP_PSR_MAX_SLEEP_TIME(max_sleep_time); > > + if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) < 20) { > > + val = EDP_PSR_ENABLE; > > That would mean you never enable PSR1 on lnl+ > > > + val |= EDP_PSR_MAX_SLEEP_TIME(max_sleep_time); > > + } > > + > > + val |= EDP_PSR_IDLE_FRAMES(psr_compute_idle_frames(intel_dp)); > > if (IS_HASWELL(dev_priv)) > > val |= EDP_PSR_MIN_LINK_ENTRY_TIME_8_LINES; > > > > @@ -1398,10 +1402,16 @@ static void intel_psr_enable_source(struct intel_dp > > *intel_dp, > > * runtime_pm besides preventing other hw tracking issues now we > > * can rely on frontbuffer tracking. > > */ > > - mask = EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_MEMUP | > > - EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_HPD | > > - EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_LPSP | > > - EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_MAX_SLEEP; > > + if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 20) > > + mask = EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_MEMUP | > > + EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_HPD | > > + EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_LPSP; > > + else > > + mask = EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_MEMUP | > > + EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_HPD | > > + EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_LPSP | > > + EDP_PSR_DEBUG_MASK_MAX_SLEEP; > > The hpd mask bit also seems gone now, though there is no explanation why it > disappeared. > > > + > > > > /* > > * No separate pipe reg write mask on hsw/bdw, so have to unmask all > > -- > > 2.34.1 > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel
