Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).

2015-07-29 Thread Rafael Antognolli 
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:26:53AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
 On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:05:21PM +, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote:
  On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 13:25 -0700, Rafael Antognolli wrote:
   On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:35:50PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
By Vesa DP 1.2 spec TEST_CRC_COUNT is a 4 bit wrap counter which
increments each time the TEST_CRC_x_x are updated.

However if we are trying to verify the screen hasn't changed we get
same (count, crc) pair twice. Without this patch we would return
-ETIMEOUT in this case.

So, if in 6 vblanks the pair (count, crc) hasn't changed we
return it anyway instead of returning error and let test case decide
if it was right or not.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.v...@intel.com
   
   Looks good.
   
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 21 +++--
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
index c7372a1..e99ec7a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
@@ -4028,6 +4028,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, 
u8 *crc)
u8 buf;
int count, ret;
int attempts = 6;
+   bool old_equal_new;
 
ret = intel_dp_sink_crc_start(intel_dp);
if (ret)
@@ -4042,6 +4043,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, 
u8 *crc)
goto stop;
}
count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
+
/*
 * Count might be reset during the loop. In this case
 * last known count needs to be reset as well.
@@ -4053,17 +4055,24 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp 
*intel_dp, u8 *crc)
ret = -EIO;
goto stop;
}
-   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || (count == 
intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
-  
!memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
-  6 * 
sizeof(u8);
+
+   old_equal_new = (count == intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 

+!memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, 
crc,
+6 * sizeof(u8)));
+
+   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || old_equal_new));
 
intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
memcpy(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc, 6 * sizeof(u8));
 
if (attempts == 0) {
-   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Panel is unable to calculate CRC after 6 
vblanks\n);
-   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
-   goto stop;
+   if (old_equal_new) {
+   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Unreliable Sink CRC counter: 
Current returned CRC is identical to the previous one\n);
   
   Isn't this line a little too long?
  
  I agree, but I had no idea how to make it shorter. I believe this long
  debug message is the only case where we can go over 80 characters in
  i915. but if it isn't true and/or have a suggestion how to make it
  shorter please let me know that I can change.
 
 dmesg output is explicitly an exception since breaking lines makes it much
 harder to grep for a line you spot in dmesg. Ofc 500 lines would be a bit
 too much, we're breaking those. But this one here is totally fine.

Nice, I never thought about being able to grep, but makes total sense.

 Remember, checkpatch is just suggestions mostly, not law.

I wasn't aware of it, but good to know that it exists. I'll check it out.

Reviewed-by: Rafael Antognolli rafael.antogno...@intel.com

  
   
+   } else {
+   DRM_ERROR(Panel is unable to calculate any CRC 
after 6 vblanks\n);
+   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
+   goto stop;
+   }
}
 
 stop:
-- 
2.1.0

___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
  
  ___
  Intel-gfx mailing list
  Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
  http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
 
 -- 
 Daniel Vetter
 Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
 http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).

2015-07-28 Thread Rafael Antognolli 
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:35:50PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
 By Vesa DP 1.2 spec TEST_CRC_COUNT is a 4 bit wrap counter which
 increments each time the TEST_CRC_x_x are updated.
 
 However if we are trying to verify the screen hasn't changed we get
 same (count, crc) pair twice. Without this patch we would return
 -ETIMEOUT in this case.
 
 So, if in 6 vblanks the pair (count, crc) hasn't changed we
 return it anyway instead of returning error and let test case decide
 if it was right or not.
 
 Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.v...@intel.com

Looks good.

 ---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 21 +++--
  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
 
 diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
 index c7372a1..e99ec7a 100644
 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
 +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
 @@ -4028,6 +4028,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
 *crc)
   u8 buf;
   int count, ret;
   int attempts = 6;
 + bool old_equal_new;
  
   ret = intel_dp_sink_crc_start(intel_dp);
   if (ret)
 @@ -4042,6 +4043,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
 *crc)
   goto stop;
   }
   count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
 +
   /*
* Count might be reset during the loop. In this case
* last known count needs to be reset as well.
 @@ -4053,17 +4055,24 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
 *crc)
   ret = -EIO;
   goto stop;
   }
 - } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || (count == 
 intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
 -
 !memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
 -6 * sizeof(u8);
 +
 + old_equal_new = (count == intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
 +  !memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
 +  6 * sizeof(u8)));
 +
 + } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || old_equal_new));
  
   intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
   memcpy(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc, 6 * sizeof(u8));
  
   if (attempts == 0) {
 - DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Panel is unable to calculate CRC after 6 
 vblanks\n);
 - ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
 - goto stop;
 + if (old_equal_new) {
 + DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Unreliable Sink CRC counter: Current 
 returned CRC is identical to the previous one\n);

Isn't this line a little too long?

 + } else {
 + DRM_ERROR(Panel is unable to calculate any CRC after 6 
 vblanks\n);
 + ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
 + goto stop;
 + }
   }
  
  stop:
 -- 
 2.1.0
 
 ___
 Intel-gfx mailing list
 Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).

2015-07-28 Thread Vivi, Rodrigo 
On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 13:25 -0700, Rafael Antognolli wrote:
 On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:35:50PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
  By Vesa DP 1.2 spec TEST_CRC_COUNT is a 4 bit wrap counter which
  increments each time the TEST_CRC_x_x are updated.
  
  However if we are trying to verify the screen hasn't changed we get
  same (count, crc) pair twice. Without this patch we would return
  -ETIMEOUT in this case.
  
  So, if in 6 vblanks the pair (count, crc) hasn't changed we
  return it anyway instead of returning error and let test case decide
  if it was right or not.
  
  Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.v...@intel.com
 
 Looks good.
 
  ---
   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 21 +++--
   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
  
  diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c 
  b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
  index c7372a1..e99ec7a 100644
  --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
  +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
  @@ -4028,6 +4028,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
  *crc)
  u8 buf;
  int count, ret;
  int attempts = 6;
  +   bool old_equal_new;
   
  ret = intel_dp_sink_crc_start(intel_dp);
  if (ret)
  @@ -4042,6 +4043,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
  *crc)
  goto stop;
  }
  count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
  +
  /*
   * Count might be reset during the loop. In this case
   * last known count needs to be reset as well.
  @@ -4053,17 +4055,24 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
  *crc)
  ret = -EIO;
  goto stop;
  }
  -   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || (count == 
  intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
  -  
  !memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
  -  6 * sizeof(u8);
  +
  +   old_equal_new = (count == intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
  +!memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
  +6 * sizeof(u8)));
  +
  +   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || old_equal_new));
   
  intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
  memcpy(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc, 6 * sizeof(u8));
   
  if (attempts == 0) {
  -   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Panel is unable to calculate CRC after 6 
  vblanks\n);
  -   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
  -   goto stop;
  +   if (old_equal_new) {
  +   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Unreliable Sink CRC counter: Current 
  returned CRC is identical to the previous one\n);
 
 Isn't this line a little too long?

I agree, but I had no idea how to make it shorter. I believe this long
debug message is the only case where we can go over 80 characters in
i915. but if it isn't true and/or have a suggestion how to make it
shorter please let me know that I can change.

 
  +   } else {
  +   DRM_ERROR(Panel is unable to calculate any CRC after 6 
  vblanks\n);
  +   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
  +   goto stop;
  +   }
  }
   
   stop:
  -- 
  2.1.0
  
  ___
  Intel-gfx mailing list
  Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
  http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Dont -ETIMEDOUT on identical new and previous (count, crc).

2015-07-23 Thread Rodrigo Vivi 
By Vesa DP 1.2 spec TEST_CRC_COUNT is a 4 bit wrap counter which
increments each time the TEST_CRC_x_x are updated.

However if we are trying to verify the screen hasn't changed we get
same (count, crc) pair twice. Without this patch we would return
-ETIMEOUT in this case.

So, if in 6 vblanks the pair (count, crc) hasn't changed we
return it anyway instead of returning error and let test case decide
if it was right or not.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.v...@intel.com
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 21 +++--
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
index c7372a1..e99ec7a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
@@ -4028,6 +4028,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
u8 buf;
int count, ret;
int attempts = 6;
+   bool old_equal_new;
 
ret = intel_dp_sink_crc_start(intel_dp);
if (ret)
@@ -4042,6 +4043,7 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 *crc)
goto stop;
}
count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
+
/*
 * Count might be reset during the loop. In this case
 * last known count needs to be reset as well.
@@ -4053,17 +4055,24 @@ int intel_dp_sink_crc(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, u8 
*crc)
ret = -EIO;
goto stop;
}
-   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || (count == 
intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
-  
!memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
-  6 * sizeof(u8);
+
+   old_equal_new = (count == intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count 
+!memcmp(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc,
+6 * sizeof(u8)));
+
+   } while (--attempts  (count == 0 || old_equal_new));
 
intel_dp-sink_crc.last_count = buf  DP_TEST_COUNT_MASK;
memcpy(intel_dp-sink_crc.last_crc, crc, 6 * sizeof(u8));
 
if (attempts == 0) {
-   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Panel is unable to calculate CRC after 6 
vblanks\n);
-   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
-   goto stop;
+   if (old_equal_new) {
+   DRM_DEBUG_KMS(Unreliable Sink CRC counter: Current 
returned CRC is identical to the previous one\n);
+   } else {
+   DRM_ERROR(Panel is unable to calculate any CRC after 6 
vblanks\n);
+   ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
+   goto stop;
+   }
}
 
 stop:
-- 
2.1.0

___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx