From: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
To: <airlied@linux.ie>, <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
<tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: drm_probe_helper: Fix output_poll_work scheduling
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 16:30:44 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfb32dae-9465-528b-7039-35787ed0213d@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160829125857.GK10980@phenom.ffwll.local>
On 08/29/16 15:58, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:50:22PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> drm_kms_helper_poll_enable_locked() should check if we have delayed event
>> pending and if we have, schedule the work to run without delay.
>>
>> Currently the output_poll_work is only scheduled if any of the connectors
>> have DRM_CONNECTOR_POLL_CONNECT or DRM_CONNECTOR_POLL_DISCONNECT with
>> DRM_OUTPUT_POLL_PERIOD delay. It does not matter if we have delayed event
>> already registered to be handled. The detection will be delayd by
>> DRM_OUTPUT_POLL_PERIOD in any case.
>> Furthermore if none of the connectors are marked as POLL_CONNECT or
>> POLL_DISCONNECT because all connectors are either POLL_HPD or they are
>> always connected: the output_poll_work will not run at all even if we
>> have delayed event marked.
>>
>> When none of the connectors require polling, their initial status change
>> from unknown to connected/disconnected is not going to be handled until
>> the first kms application starts or if we have fb console enabled.
>>
>> With this change we can react more quickly to output status changes after
>> enabling the poll but most importantly it will correct the behavior when
>> none of the connector have POLL_CONNECT or POLL_DISCONNECT flag set - they
>> are either POLL_HPD or the .polled is 0. The initial status change is going
>> to be handled correctly as well.
>
> Don't we need to set delayed_event somewhere too first? At least I don't
> really understand how this speeds things up
The delayed_event is set first in the
drm_helper_probe_single_connector_modes_merge_bits() when the force is not set.
The drm_kms_helper_poll_init() is called by drivers when they have their
connectors set up. So when probing the drivers we will first set up the
connectors, they will move from connector_status_unknown to connected or
disconnected and the delayed_event is set.
Later the drm_kms_helper_poll_init() is called and that will schedule the work
with DRM_OUTPUT_POLL_PERIOD. So even if we now know the state of the
connectors, they will be checked by the poll_work when the work is running
with a delay. If we set the delay to 0 the detection will run much faster.
Is this makes more sense?
> ... The patch itself looks
> like a valid bugfix, but the description confuses me a bit. I think if you
> delete the above paragraph (starting with "With this change we can react
> ...") then it's all good.
I can drop the last paragraph.
> -Daniel
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_probe_helper.c | 8 +++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_probe_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_probe_helper.c
>> index a0df377d7d1c..f6b64d7d3528 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_probe_helper.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_probe_helper.c
>> @@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ void drm_kms_helper_poll_enable_locked(struct drm_device *dev)
>> {
>> bool poll = false;
>> struct drm_connector *connector;
>> + unsigned long delay = DRM_OUTPUT_POLL_PERIOD;
>>
>> WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&dev->mode_config.mutex));
>>
>> @@ -141,8 +142,13 @@ void drm_kms_helper_poll_enable_locked(struct drm_device *dev)
>> poll = true;
>> }
>>
>> + if (dev->mode_config.delayed_event) {
>> + poll = true;
>> + delay = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> if (poll)
>> - schedule_delayed_work(&dev->mode_config.output_poll_work, DRM_OUTPUT_POLL_PERIOD);
>> + schedule_delayed_work(&dev->mode_config.output_poll_work, delay);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_kms_helper_poll_enable_locked);
>>
>> --
>> 2.9.3
>>
>
--
Péter
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-29 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-29 9:50 Peter Ujfalusi
2016-08-29 12:58 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-08-29 13:30 ` Peter Ujfalusi [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=cfb32dae-9465-528b-7039-35787ed0213d@ti.com \
--to=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®