Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <0ff3d6a3-dc5c-7c77-f8a1-6c4f6c1a3215@quicinc.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Jun 2022 16:30:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] drm/msm/dp: decoupling dp->id out of dp
 controller_id at scxxxx_dp_cfg table
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>, <agross@kernel.org>,
        <airlied@linux.ie>, <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        <daniel@ffwll.ch>, <dianders@chromium.org>,
        <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>, <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        <robdclark@gmail.com>, <sean@poorly.run>, <vkoul@kernel.org>
CC:     <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>, <quic_aravindh@quicinc.com>,
        <quic_sbillaka@quicinc.com>, <freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1656090912-18074-1-git-send-email-quic_khsieh@quicinc.com>
 <1656090912-18074-3-git-send-email-quic_khsieh@quicinc.com>
 <CAE-0n52RW+UFJ=hqMWjwR8qvEbww7QjzPW1nhL3Atd97QXAnYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007ea4c9-9701-f4ab-3278-5d36bf2018c4@quicinc.com>
 <CAE-0n53kNCK0ajHfY2WQr5HEQZtZSBLnhfbTuZwaUNEOZhsKPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <fa7f8bf1-33cd-5515-0143-6596df2bd740@quicinc.com>
 <CAE-0n51g-EVsC-i9=sJV-ySa8VnE+yT7cg=b-TNMi9+3uBiOVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <326912ff-9771-0711-366d-79acd436908b@quicinc.com>
 <CAE-0n51qrdrFtSr0vRwgYkMgSZfnzQuinaUROQsp30QoDchWQA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAE-0n51qrdrFtSr0vRwgYkMgSZfnzQuinaUROQsp30QoDchWQA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 6/24/2022 4:12 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Kuogee Hsieh (2022-06-24 15:53:45)
>> MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1 need to match to the index = 1 of sc7280_dp_cfg[] <== This is correct
>>
>> The problem is sc7280_dp_cfg[] have two entries since eDP place at index
>> of MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1.
>>
>> but .num_desc = 1  <== this said only have one entry at sc7280_dp_cfg[]
>> table. Therefore eDP will never be found at for loop  at
>> _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport().
>>
> Yes, but what else does the MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1 need to match? Because
> the intention of the previous commit was to make it so the order of
> sc7280_dp_cfg couldn't be messed up and not match the
> MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1 value that lives in sc7280_intf[].


at  _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport()

> -		info.h_tile_instance[0] = i; <== assign i to become dp controller id, "i" is index of scxxxx_dp_cfg[]

This what I mean MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1 need to match to index = 1 of 
scxxxx_dp_cfg[].

it it is not match, then MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1 with match to different INTF.


>
>> Sorry, my mistake. it is not in drm_bridge_add.
>>
>> It should be in dpu_encoder_init() of _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport().
>>
>> can you make below changes (patch) to _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport().
>>
> Yes, I've made that change to try to understand the problem. I still
> don't understand, sadly. Does flipping the order of iteration through
> 'priv->dp' somehow mean that the crtc that is assigned to the eDP
> connector is left unchanged? Whereas without registering the eDP encoder
> first means we have to change the crtc for the eDP encoder and that
> can't be done atomically?