| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20191217164702.v2.9.Ib59207b66db377380d13748752d6fce5596462c5@changeid>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 16:47:41 -0800
From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc: robdclark@...omium.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, seanpaul@...omium.org,
Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 9/9] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Avoid invalid rates
Based on work by Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>, and
Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>.
Let's read the SUPPORTED_LINK_RATES and/or MAX_LINK_RATE (depending on
the eDP version of the sink) to figure out what eDP rates are
supported and pick the ideal one.
Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
---
Changes in v2:
- Patch ("Avoid invalid rates") replaces ("Skip non-standard DP rates")
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
index e1b817ccd9c7..da5ddf6be92b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
@@ -475,39 +475,103 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_calc_min_dp_rate_idx(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
return i;
}
-static int ti_sn_bridge_get_max_dp_rate_idx(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
+static void ti_sn_bridge_read_valid_rates(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata,
+ bool rate_valid[])
{
- u8 data;
+ u8 dpcd_val;
+ int rate_times_200khz;
int ret;
+ int i;
- ret = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&pdata->aux, DP_MAX_LINK_RATE, &data);
+ ret = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&pdata->aux, DP_EDP_DPCD_REV, &dpcd_val);
+ if (ret != 1) {
+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
+ "Can't read eDP rev (%d), assuming 1.1\n", ret);
+ dpcd_val = DP_EDP_11;
+ }
+
+ if (dpcd_val >= DP_EDP_14) {
+ /* eDP 1.4 devices must provide a custom table */
+ __le16 sink_rates[DP_MAX_SUPPORTED_RATES];
+
+ ret = drm_dp_dpcd_read(&pdata->aux, DP_SUPPORTED_LINK_RATES,
+ sink_rates, sizeof(sink_rates));
+
+ if (ret != sizeof(sink_rates)) {
+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
+ "Can't read supported rate table (%d)\n", ret);
+
+ /* By zeroing we'll fall back to DP_MAX_LINK_RATE. */
+ memset(sink_rates, 0, sizeof(sink_rates));
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sink_rates); i++) {
+ rate_times_200khz = le16_to_cpu(sink_rates[i]);
+
+ if (!rate_times_200khz)
+ break;
+
+ switch (rate_times_200khz) {
+ case 27000:
+ rate_valid[7] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 21600:
+ rate_valid[6] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 16200:
+ rate_valid[5] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 13500:
+ rate_valid[4] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 12150:
+ rate_valid[3] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 10800:
+ rate_valid[2] = 1;
+ break;
+ case 8100:
+ rate_valid[1] = 1;
+ break;
+ default:
+ /* unsupported */
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut); i++) {
+ if (rate_valid[i])
+ return;
+ }
+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
+ "No matching eDP rates in table; falling back\n");
+ }
+
+ /* On older versions best we can do is use DP_MAX_LINK_RATE */
+ ret = drm_dp_dpcd_readb(&pdata->aux, DP_MAX_LINK_RATE, &dpcd_val);
if (ret != 1) {
DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
"Can't read max rate (%d); assuming 5.4 GHz\n",
ret);
- return ARRAY_SIZE(ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut) - 1;
+ dpcd_val = DP_LINK_BW_5_4;
}
- /*
- * Return an index into ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut. Just hardcode
- * these indicies since it's not like the register spec is ever going
- * to change and a loop would just be more complicated. Apparently
- * the DP sink can only return these few rates as supported even
- * though the bridge allows some rates in between.
- */
- switch (data) {
- case DP_LINK_BW_1_62:
- return 1;
- case DP_LINK_BW_2_7:
- return 4;
+ switch (dpcd_val) {
+ default:
+ DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
+ "Unexpected max rate (%#x); assuming 5.4 GHz\n",
+ (int)dpcd_val);
+ /* fall through */
case DP_LINK_BW_5_4:
- return 7;
+ rate_valid[7] = 1;
+ /* fall through */
+ case DP_LINK_BW_2_7:
+ rate_valid[4] = 1;
+ /* fall through */
+ case DP_LINK_BW_1_62:
+ rate_valid[1] = 1;
+ break;
}
-
- DRM_DEV_ERROR(pdata->dev,
- "Unexpected max data rate (%#x); assuming 5.4 GHz\n",
- (int)data);
- return ARRAY_SIZE(ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut) - 1;
}
static void ti_sn_bridge_set_video_timings(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
@@ -609,9 +673,9 @@ static int ti_sn_link_training(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata, int dp_rate_idx,
static void ti_sn_bridge_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
{
struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn_bridge(bridge);
+ bool rate_valid[ARRAY_SIZE(ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut)];
const char *last_err_str = "No supported DP rate";
int dp_rate_idx;
- int max_dp_rate_idx;
unsigned int val;
int ret = -EINVAL;
@@ -655,11 +719,15 @@ static void ti_sn_bridge_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
regmap_update_bits(pdata->regmap, SN_SSC_CONFIG_REG, DP_NUM_LANES_MASK,
val);
+ ti_sn_bridge_read_valid_rates(pdata, rate_valid);
+
/* Train until we run out of rates */
- max_dp_rate_idx = ti_sn_bridge_get_max_dp_rate_idx(pdata);
for (dp_rate_idx = ti_sn_bridge_calc_min_dp_rate_idx(pdata);
- dp_rate_idx <= max_dp_rate_idx;
+ dp_rate_idx < ARRAY_SIZE(ti_sn_bridge_dp_rate_lut);
dp_rate_idx++) {
+ if (!rate_valid[dp_rate_idx])
+ continue;
+
ret = ti_sn_link_training(pdata, dp_rate_idx, &last_err_str);
if (!ret)
break;
--
2.24.1.735.g03f4e72817-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists