[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c9c5064e-e780-4bfe-b85d-7930df7a5443@denx.de>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 15:47:25 +0100
From: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To: Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
Cc: 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>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm: bridge: ti-sn65dsi83: Add error recovery
mechanism
On 10/28/24 2:52 PM, Herve Codina wrote:
> Hi Marek,
Hi,
>>> On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 00:53:51 +0200
>>> Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/24/24 11:55 AM, Herve Codina wrote:
>>>>> In some cases observed during ESD tests, the TI SN65DSI83 cannot recover
>>>>> from errors by itself. A full restart of the bridge is needed in those
>>>>> cases to have the bridge output LVDS signals again.
>>>>
>>>> I have seen the bridge being flaky sometimes, do you have any more
>>>> details of what is going on when this irrecoverable error occurs ?
>>>
>>> The panel attached to the bridge goes and stays black. That's the behavior.
>>> A full reset brings the panel back displaying frames.
>> Is there some noticeable change in 0xe0/0xe1/0xe5 registers, esp. 0xe5,
>> do they indicate the error occurred somehow ?
>
> 0xe5 register can signal any DSI errors (depending on when the ESD affects
> the DSI bus) even PLL unlock bit was observed set but we didn't see any
> relationship between the bits set in 0xe5 register and the recoverable or
> unrecoverable behavior.
>
> Also, in some cases, reading the register was not even possible (i2c
> transaction nacked).
Oh, wow, I haven't seen that one before. But this is really useful
information, can you please add it into the commit message for V2 ?
Thank you
Powered by blists - more mailing lists