lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] drm/stm: ltdc: improve pm_runtime to stop clocks
Date

On 7/2/21 8:07 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 7/2/21 11:23 AM, Raphael Gallais-Pou wrote:
>> Hello Marek,
>
> Hi,
>
>> Sorry for the late answer.
>
> No worries, take your time
>
>> On 6/30/21 2:35 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On 6/29/21 1:58 PM, Raphael GALLAIS-POU - foss wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/ltdc.c
>>>> @@ -425,10 +425,17 @@ static void ltdc_crtc_atomic_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>>>>   {
>>>>       struct ltdc_device *ldev = crtc_to_ltdc(crtc);
>>>>       struct drm_device *ddev = crtc->dev;
>>>> +    int ret;
>>>>         DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("\n");
>>>>   -    pm_runtime_get_sync(ddev->dev);
>>>> +    if (!pm_runtime_active(ddev->dev)) {
>>>> +        ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(ddev->dev);
>>>
>>> All these if (!pm_runtime_active()) then pm_runtime_get_sync() calls look like workaround for some larger issue. Shouldn't the pm_runtime do some refcounting on its own , so this shouldn't be needed ?
>>
>>
>> This problem purely comes from the driver internals, so I don't think it is a workaround.
>>
>> Because of the "ltdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb" function which does not have any "symmetrical" call, such as enable/disable functions, there was two calls to pm_runtime_get_sync against one call to pm_runtime_put_sync.
>>
>> This instability resulted in the LTDC clocks being always enabled, even when the peripheral was disabled. This could be seen in the clk_summary as explained in the patch summary among other things.
>>
>> By doing so, we first check if the clocks are not already activated, and in that case we call pm_runtime_get_sync.
>
> I just have to wonder, how come other drivers don't need these if (!pm_runtime_active()) pm_runtime_get_sync() conditions. I think they just get/put the runtime PM within a call itself, not across function calls. Maybe that could be the right fix here too ?


Hello Marek,


I've run a deeper analysis over this implementation.

If I may take rockchip's "rockchip_drm_vop.c" driver, there is an boolean "is_enabled" set to true when crtc_atomic_enable is called.

The above implementation could save us from adding such field in the ltdc_dev structure.

Another solution could be in order to simply call pm_runtime_get_sync() in ltdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb() and by removing this condition in ltdc_atomic_crtc_disable() the driver behaves just like the first version of this patch.

In this way, it avoids such conditions and seems more to get along with the current implementation.


Regards,

Raphaël

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-08-17 11:45    [W:0.072 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site