lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d79602b9-8e04-8250-fd7f-f52b8e16c575@micronovasrl.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:50:18 +0100
From:   Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ronovasrl.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     airlied@...ux.ie, wens@...e.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/sun4i: Handle DRM_MODE_FLAG_**SYNC_POSITIVE
 correctly

Hi,

Il 25/01/2018 16:21, Maxime Ripard ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 08:37:28PM +0100, Giulio Benetti wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Il 24/01/2018 18:38, Giulio Benetti ha scritto:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Il 22/01/2018 21:27, Giulio Benetti ha scritto:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Il 22/01/2018 09:51, Maxime Ripard ha scritto:
>>>>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 07:50:21PM +0100, Giulio Benetti wrote:
>>>>>> On previous handling, if specified DRM_MODE_FLAG_N*SYNC,
>>>>>> it was ignored,
>>>>>> because only PHSYNC and PVSYNC were taken into account.
>>>>>> DRM_MODE_FLAG_P*SYNC and DRM_MODE_FLAG_N*SYNC are not exclusive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If flags contains PVSYNC, it doesn't mean it is NVSYNC.
>>>>>> And it's true also the contrary.
>>>>>> Also, as I've checked with scope on A20,
>>>>>> if (flags & PVSYNC) then SUN4I_TCON0_IO_POL_VSYNC_POSITIVE
>>>>>> must be set, as name suggests.
>>>>>> It seems all display io polarities starts inverted if 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ronovasrl.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PVSYNC and PHSYNC only
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ronovasrl.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Checkpatch:
>>>>> WARNING: Duplicate signature
>>>>
>>>> Sorry I didn't use ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_tcon.c | 4 ++--
>>>>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_tcon.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_tcon.c
>>>>>> index 6121210..e873a37 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_tcon.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_tcon.c
>>>>>> @@ -224,10 +224,10 @@ static void
>>>>>> sun4i_tcon0_mode_set_rgb(struct sun4i_tcon *tcon,
>>>>>>                 SUN4I_TCON0_BASIC3_H_SYNC(hsync));
>>>>>>        /* Setup the polarity of the various signals */
>>>>>> -    if (!(mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PHSYNC))
>>>>>> +    if (mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PHSYNC)
>>>>>>            val |= SUN4I_TCON0_IO_POL_HSYNC_POSITIVE;
>>>>>> -    if (!(mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC))
>>>>>> +    if (mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC)
>>>>>>            val |= SUN4I_TCON0_IO_POL_VSYNC_POSITIVE;
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure why you were talking of the differences between NVSYNC
>>>>> and PVSYNC if you're not making use of any of it here?
>>>>
>>>> Thinking about it more now, the point is that all Lcd IOs seem to be
>>>> inverted by default(at least on A20).
>>>> With inverted, I mean that if for example PVSYNC,
>>>> I should see vsync line low and when asserted to give VSync,
>>>> it goes high.
>>>> This is what I've checked with oscilloscope on A20.
>>>> Can someone give a try on A33? Otherwise I will,
>>>> but I will take some time.
>>>> On uboot, everything is treated equal to kernel,
>>>> but to have my falling edge dclk and low h/vsync I had to specify:
>>>> CONFIG_VIDEO_LCD_DCLK_PHASE=0 (giving me falling edge on dclk)
>>>> and
>>>> CONFIG_VIDEO_LCD_MODE="....,sync:3,..."
>>>> but digging into code, I see "sync:3" means H/VSYNC HIGH,
>>>> but I experience both LOW during their pulse.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, how was it tested? This seems quite weird that we haven't caught
>>>>> that one sooner, and I'm a bit worried about the possible regressions
>>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> It sounds really strange to me too,
>>>> because everybody under uboot use "sync:3"(HIGH).
>>>> I will retry to measure,
>>>> unfortunately at home I don't have a scope,
>>>> but I think I'm going to have one soon, because of this. :)
>>>
>>> Here I am with scope captures and tcon0 registers dump:
>>> tcon0_regs => https://pasteboard.co/H4r8Zcs.png
>>> dclk_d0 => https://pasteboard.co/H4r8QRe.png
>>> dclk_de => https://pasteboard.co/H4r8zh4R.png
>>> dclk_vsnc => https://pasteboard.co/H4r8Hye.png
>>>
>>> As you can see circled in reg on registers,
>>> TCON0_IO_POL_REG = 0x00000000.
>>> But on all the waveforms you can see:
>>> - dclk_d0: clock phase is 0, but it starts with falling edge, otherwise
>>> the rising front overlaps dclk rising edge(not good), so to me this is
>>> falling, then I mean it Negative.
>>> - dclk_de: de pulse is clearly negative, even if register is 0 and its'
>>> polarity bit is 0.
>>> - dclk_vsnc: same as dclk_de
>>> - dclk_hsync: I didn't take scope screenshot but I can assure you it's
>>> negative.
>>>
>>> You can also check all the other registers about TCON0.
>>>
>>> Now I proceed testing it on A33, maybe the peripheral is slightly
>>> different between Axx SoCs, if I find it that way,
>>> it should be only a check about SoC or peripheral ID,
>>> and treat polarity as it should be done.
>>
>> Here I am with A33 waveforms:
>> tcon0_regs => https://pasteboard.co/H4rXfN0M.png
>> dclk_d0 => https://pasteboard.co/H4rVXwy.png
>> dclk_de => https://pasteboard.co/H4rWDt8.png
>> dclk_vsnc => https://pasteboard.co/H4rWRACu.png
>> dclk_hsync => https://pasteboard.co/H4rWK6I.png
> 
> Thanks, that's really helpful.
> 
>> It behaves the same way as A20, so as I mean IO polarity,
>> all signals(except D0-D23), are inverted.
>> For A33 I've used A33-OLinuXino.
>> For A20 our LiNova1.
> 
> Indeed, HSYNC and VSYNC look inverted. 

Yes, so they should be inverted inside the driver.

> I don't really know what the
> polarity of D0 would be just by judging at that capture, but we would
> have noticed if the colors were inverted for quite some time now.

D0-D23 are correct.
With that capture,
I mean to show you instead dclk is inverted,
as dclk samples D0 on falling edge.
So 0 is NEGEDGE and 1 is POSEDGE(1/3 of clock phase).
1/3 clock phase seems enough to me to be considered POSEDGE,
2/3 instead risks to go too much to the right of D0(even if it could work).

> 
> DE seems to be active high though, since it's only going to be at a
> logical low level when data are not transmitted, so during the blank
> periods.

Yes, you're right, DE is data enable, and is asserted high as 0.
But it must be added.
I'm planning to send a new patchset with all these things corrected for 
kernel.

A little out of thread but:
I'd like to send one for u-boot too,
but this means also to modify every sunxi "sync:3" to "sync:0" and 
vice-versa.

What do you think?

> 
> Maxime
> 


-- 
Giulio Benetti
R&D Manager &
Advanced Research

MICRONOVA SRL
Sede: Via A. Niedda 3 - 35010 Vigonza (PD)
Tel. 049/8931563 - Fax 049/8931346
Cod.Fiscale - P.IVA 02663420285
Capitale Sociale € 26.000 i.v.
Iscritta al Reg. Imprese di Padova N. 02663420285
Numero R.E.A. 258642

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ