[PATCH v2] drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms

Currently, the driver is only waiting for 1ms for idle patterns. But starting from LNL and beyond, the MST wants the driver to wait for 1640us before timing out (which we round up to 2ms). v1: Introduced the 2ms wait timeout. v2: Segregated the wait timeout for platforms before & after LNL.

✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms

== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/130643/ State : warning == Summary == Error: dim checkpatch failed aee3aa2feba0 drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms -:27: ERROR:SPACING: space

✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms

== Series Details == Series: drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/130643/ State : failure == Summary == CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_14379 -> Patchwork_130643v1 Summary

Regression on linux-next (next-20240228)

Hello Matthew, Hope you are doing well. I am Chaitanya from the linux graphics team in Intel. This mail is regarding a regression we are seeing in our CI runs[1] on linux-next repository. Since the version next-20240228 [2], we are seeing the following regression

[PATCH v3] drm/i915/dp: Increase idle pattern wait timeout to 2ms

Currently, the driver is only waiting for 1ms for idle patterns. But starting from LNL and beyond, the MST wants the driver to wait for 1640us before timing out (which we round up to 2ms). v1: Introduced the 2ms wait timeout. v2: Segregated the wait timeout for platforms before & after LNL. v3:

Re: Regression on linux-next (next-20240228)

On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 04:49:47AM +, Borah, Chaitanya Kumar wrote: > After bisecting the tree, the following patch [4] seems to be the first "bad" > commit > > ` > commit

RE: [PATCH v2 8/8] drm/i915: Handle joined pipes inside hsw_crtc_disable()

Thank you very much Ville and Stan. With https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/130619/ and https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/130449/ tested that 6K works Tested-by: Vidya Srinivas > -Original Message- > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of Ville > Syrjala > Sent: Friday, March 1,

[RFC 1/3] drm/i915/alpm: Move alpm parameters from intel_psr

ALPM can be enabled for non psr panel and currenly aplm-params are encapsulated under intel_psr struct, so moving out to intel_dp struct. Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna --- .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h| 23 +- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 42

[RFC 2/3] drm/i915/alpm: Add compute config for lobf

Link Off Between Active Frames, is a new feature for eDP that allows the panel to go to lower power state after transmission of data. This is a feature on top of ALPM, AS SDP. Add compute config during atomic-check phase. Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna ---

[RFC 0/3] Link off between frames for edp

Link Off Between Active Frames (LOBF) allows an eDP link to be turned Off and On durning long VBLANK durations without enabling any of the PSR/PSR2/PR modes of operation. Bspec: 71477 Note: This is a feature has dependency on ALPM, AS SDP. So the below changes are done on top of the following

[RFC 3/3] drm/i915/alpm: Enable lobf from source in ALPM_CTL

Set the Link Off Between Frames Enable bit in ALPM_CTL register. Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h | 1 + drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 5 + 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git