Received: by 2002:a25:31c3:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x186csp6221494ybx; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwVlgoQTI3M9kcxNCwqrl7DWGoazAyuNOWdWYXdZ70DkhY5KNf5yVL/hHI47lKXwvJeM/aT X-Received: by 2002:a50:85cd:: with SMTP id q13mr27240309edh.152.1573480579091; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1573480579; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ncZQOnKfaSngYtge6vBLZF20gTxC8WHsQaw3MwCY+mAcOT/VwSboJZ+pmBXhP9x7Il XHGxUedc7R6wD7vx379d+OxiHlSzgwavse7Sn7m2/1w8dZABaA42LGdGS9tnPf6iAyu6 vgomCQ4nQsTAz1NC3FfBQdAOCtwOlYTLcAapimd8v1dajqKPcw3T/9H2TfyRHgHvUAlZ ne91a2btu33v864JU5EEaOHwI1eUmas0ur2IbF3qYLn0Tv5NnO4rCyuddFpbLzHNVM8B v27ZUZNA0hx3jJ46Mnwp8mgYSBGsLV4txA+ctIr3kaWe71Vd69vB3OqMdmKteDfNL3Dp DgUw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=EMc/hJ6RdB9sycQJHcko1+RlHAad4UP5GLsa06aUxlg=; b=Oy6qzyF156v2VxgR/8VuWTrguhgGj1fR9XbOvyEgAHf+U8JkR0zHb+awBKlgXJsQZG mRnjfDhF3H8ITHpRWQd5P7lFaz0Yxb4sWTCTwLEQURm6U2BLEWM7nLly008TXui3livr OpsWHyBkkVzyyzsfiWBgTJ6uoDdOAQ3IJSR0ArbqhYYAQrKDQ0QWdOuuTXcTG3mv4jrV ZsuvvTvCkvfzD5JUGZsuwfgXn7AES6uomv0ADCJT4u2pCs9+FJdpvb/5qlTW/3Sw/VYa wAHChbPQ2sIlyGH0JTozH1Tk1el96R/ObzQmgmTuhTc3/HWf1759lTBslYzDZIX51Ul8 AP9w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y38si11721039edb.87.2019.11.11.05.55.54; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 05:56:19 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727023AbfKKNzB (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 08:55:01 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:58271 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726915AbfKKNzB (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 08:55:01 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Nov 2019 05:55:01 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,293,1569308400"; d="scan'208";a="207119211" Received: from stinkbox.fi.intel.com (HELO stinkbox) ([10.237.72.174]) by orsmga006.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2019 05:54:57 -0800 Received: by stinkbox (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:54:56 +0200 Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:54:56 +0200 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: allen.chen@ite.com.tw Cc: Jau-Chih.Tseng@ite.com.tw, maxime.ripard@bootlin.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, airlied@linux.ie, pihsun@chromium.org, sean@poorly.run Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/edid: fixup EDID 1.3 and 1.4 judge reduced-blanking timings logic Message-ID: <20191111135456.GL1208@intel.com> References: <1572856969-12115-1-git-send-email-allen.chen@ite.com.tw> <20191107154209.GC1208@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 01:43:52AM +0000, allen.chen@ite.com.tw wrote: > Hi Ville Syrjälä > > Thanks for your suggestion and I have replied two comments below. > > From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2019 11:42 PM > To: Allen Chen (陳柏宇) > Cc: Jau-Chih Tseng (曾昭智); Maxime Ripard; open list; open list:DRM DRIVERS; David Airlie; Pi-Hsun Shih; Sean Paul > Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/edid: fixup EDID 1.3 and 1.4 judge reduced-blanking timings logic > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:42:49PM +0800, allen wrote: > > According to VESA ENHANCED EXTENDED DISPLAY IDENTIFICATION DATA STANDARD > > (Defines EDID Structure Version 1, Revision 4) page: 39 > > How to determine whether the monitor support RB timing or not? > > EDID 1.4 > > First: read detailed timing descriptor and make sure byte0 = 0, > > byte1 = 0, byte2 = 0 and byte3 = 0xFD > > That should probably be some new function: > bool is_display_descriptor(const u8 *desc, u8 tag); > is_display_descriptor(EDID_DETAIL_MONITOR_RANGE) > or something along those lines > > We don't seem to check that in most places so should be rolled out all > over. The usage of struct detailed_timing all over also makes everything > rather confusing. > > > Second: read detailed timing descriptor byte10 = 0x04 and > > EDID byte18h bit0 = 1 > > Indicates CVT support. Should give these things real names so > one wouldn't have to decode by hand. > > > Third: if EDID byte18h bit0 == 1 && byte10 == 0x04, > > then we can check byte15, if byte15 bit4 =1 is support RB > > if EDID byte18h bit0 != 1 || byte10 != 0x04, > > then byte15 can not be used > > > > The linux code is_rb function not follow the VESA's rule > > > > EDID 1.3 > > LCD flat panels do not require long blanking intervals as a retrace > > period so default support reduced-blanking timings. > > > > Signed-off-by: Allen Chen > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > index e5e7e65..9b67b80 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > @@ -93,6 +93,11 @@ struct detailed_mode_closure { > > int modes; > > }; > > > > +struct edid_support_rb_closure { > > + struct edid *edid; > > + s8 support_rb; > > bool > > ==> ITE: If use bool, we could not return EDID1.3 when EDID1.4 logic can not be applied Hmm. Could use two bools then. > > +}; > > + > > #define LEVEL_DMT 0 > > #define LEVEL_GTF 1 > > #define LEVEL_GTF2 2 > > @@ -2018,22 +2023,31 @@ struct drm_display_mode *drm_mode_find_dmt(struct drm_device *dev, > > is_rb(struct detailed_timing *t, void *data) > > { > > u8 *r = (u8 *)t; > > - if (r[3] == EDID_DETAIL_MONITOR_RANGE) > > - if (r[15] & 0x10) > > - *(bool *)data = true; > > + struct edid_support_rb_closure *closure = data; > > + struct edid *edid = closure->edid; > > + > > + if (!r[0] && !r[1] && !r[2] && r[3] == EDID_DETAIL_MONITOR_RANGE) { > > + if (edid->features & BIT(0) && r[10] == BIT(2)) > > + closure->support_rb = (r[15] & 0x10) ? 1 : 0; > > With the bool the ternary operator is not needed. Also should maybe > be |= in case we have multiple range descriptors? Not sure that is > legal. > > > + } > > } > > > > /* EDID 1.4 defines this explicitly. For EDID 1.3, we guess, badly. */ > > static bool > > drm_monitor_supports_rb(struct edid *edid) > > { > > + struct edid_support_rb_closure closure = { > > + .edid = edid, > > + .support_rb = -1, > > + }; > > + > > if (edid->revision >= 4) { > > - bool ret = false; > > - drm_for_each_detailed_block((u8 *)edid, is_rb, &ret); > > - return ret; > > + drm_for_each_detailed_block((u8 *)edid, is_rb, &closure); > > + if (closure.support_rb >= 0) > > + return closure.support_rb; > > } > > > > - return ((edid->input & DRM_EDID_INPUT_DIGITAL) != 0); > > + return true; > > Why are we now assuming rb for all pre 1.4 EDIDs? > > ==> ITE: Today, most of the monitor are LCD and LCD monitor do not require long blanking intervals as a retrace period so default support reduced-blanking timings. You can't assume such things. Someone out there is surely still using something that doesn't do reduced blanking. > > > } > > > > static void > > -- > > 1.9.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel -- Ville Syrjälä Intel