lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Radeon regression fix
On 29/09/11 23:21, Brad Campbell wrote:
> On 29/09/11 22:36, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Brad Campbell<brad@fnarfbargle.com>
>> wrote:
>>> This patch fixes a regression introduced between 2.6.39& 3.1-rc1 whereby
>>> the displayport AUX channel stopped re-trying commands that elicited
>>> a DEFER
>>> response.
>>>
>>
>> It should still be retrying, just restructured slightly. The retry
>> logic just moved into radeon_dp_i2c_aux_ch(),
>> radeon_dp_aux_native_write(), and radeon_dp_aux_native_read(), e.g.,
>>
>> else if ((ack& AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_MASK) == AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_DEFER)
>> udelay(400);
>>
>> Perhaps the delay is causing a problem. Does removing the udelay(400);
>> help?

Looking at it with a nights sleep, it's obvious the code path in
aux_native_write is ok. Is this a bit cleaner than the last patch?

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_dp.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_dp.c
index 7ad43c6..aacc97d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_dp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_dp.c
@@ -158,14 +158,17 @@ static int radeon_dp_aux_native_read(struct
radeon_connector *radeon_connector,
while (1) {
ret = radeon_process_aux_ch(dig_connector->dp_i2c_bus,
msg, msg_bytes, recv,
recv_bytes, delay, &ack);
- if (ret == 0)
+ if (ret == 0){
+ if ((ack & AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_MASK) ==
AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_DEFER){
+ udelay(400);
+ continue;
+ }
return -EPROTO;
+ }
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
if ((ack & AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_MASK) == AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_ACK)
return ret;
- else if ((ack & AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_MASK) ==
AUX_NATIVE_REPLY_DEFER)
- udelay(400);
else
return -EIO;
}

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-30 02:25    [W:0.048 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site