linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] drm/bridge: samsung-dsim: Fix porch calcalcuation rounding

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c20b59a1-4aba-4c68-b2b0-5cb4a0281540@kontron.de>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 10:40:32 +0200
From: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@...tron.de>
To: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>,
 Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, marex@...x.de, aford@...conembedded.com,
 Inki Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>, Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
 Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Robert Foss <rfoss@...nel.org>,
 Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
 Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
 Marco Felsch <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>,
 Michael Tretter <m.tretter@...gutronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] drm/bridge: samsung-dsim: Fix porch calcalcuation
 rounding

On 25.04.24 22:30, Adam Ford wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 4:19 AM Marek Szyprowski
> <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12.02.2024 00:09, Adam Ford wrote:
>>> When using video sync pulses, the HFP, HBP, and HSA are divided between
>>> the available lanes if there is more than one lane.  For certain
>>> timings and lane configurations, the HFP may not be evenly divisible.
>>> If the HFP is rounded down, it ends up being too small which can cause
>>> some monitors to not sync properly. In these instances, adjust htotal
>>> and hsync to round the HFP up, and recalculate the htotal.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@...tron.de> # Kontron BL i.MX8MM with HDMI monitor
>>> Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
>>
>> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
> 
> Thank you very much for testing!
> 
>>
>>> ---
>>> V2:  No changes
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
>>> index 8476650c477c..52939211fe93 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
>>> @@ -1606,6 +1606,27 @@ static int samsung_dsim_atomic_check(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>>>               adjusted_mode->flags |= (DRM_MODE_FLAG_PHSYNC | DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC);
>>>       }
>>>
>>> +     /*
>>> +      * When using video sync pulses, the HFP, HBP, and HSA are divided between
>>> +      * the available lanes if there is more than one lane.  For certain
>>> +      * timings and lane configurations, the HFP may not be evenly divisible.
>>> +      * If the HFP is rounded down, it ends up being too small which can cause
>>> +      * some monitors to not sync properly. In these instances, adjust htotal
>>> +      * and hsync to round the HFP up, and recalculate the htotal. Through trial
>>> +      * and error, it appears that the HBP and HSA do not appearto need the same
>>> +      * correction that HFP does.
>>> +      */
>>> +     if (dsi->mode_flags & MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO_SYNC_PULSE && dsi->lanes > 1) {
> 
> Frieder  &  Marek S,
> 
> Marek V is proposing we eliminate the check against the flags and do
> it unconditionally.  If I send you both a different patch, would you
> be willing to try them on your platforms?  I don't want to risk
> breaking a board.
> I used the check above from the NXP downstream kernel, so it felt
> safe, but I am not as familiar with the different DSI modes, so I am
> not sure what the impact would be if this read:
> 
>  if (dsi->lanes > 1) {
> 
> Does anyone else have an opinion on this?

My test only covers hardware with the ADV7535 which sets
MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO_SYNC_PULSE. Doing the test without the check for
this flag won't make any difference in this case and it's therefore not
worth repeating the test.