linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] msm: skip the atomic commit of self refresh while PSR running

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0e75e04d-fc07-2f60-bfb9-ee092075fae6@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2023 18:28:53 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Vinod Polimera <quic_vpolimer@...cinc.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robdclark@...il.com,
        dianders@...omium.org, swboyd@...omium.org,
        quic_kalyant@...cinc.com, quic_khsieh@...cinc.com,
        quic_vproddut@...cinc.com, quic_bjorande@...cinc.com,
        quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, quic_sbillaka@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] msm: skip the atomic commit of self refresh while
 PSR running

On 31/03/2023 16:58, Vinod Polimera wrote:
> In certain CPU stress conditions, there can be a delay in scheduling commit
> work and it was observed that PSR commit from a different work queue was
> scheduled. Avoid these commits as display is already in PSR mode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vinod Polimera <quic_vpolimer@...cinc.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_atomic.c | 3 +++
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_atomic.c
> index 645fe53..f8141bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_atomic.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_atomic.c
> @@ -192,6 +192,9 @@ int msm_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_atomic_state *state)

The corresponding patch is not yet applied. I wonder how this was tested.

>   			new_crtc_state->mode_changed = true;
>   			state->allow_modeset = true;
>   		}
> +
> +		if (old_crtc_state->self_refresh_active && new_crtc_state->self_refresh_active)
> +			return -EINVAL;
>   	}
>   
>   	return drm_atomic_helper_check(dev, state);

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry