Summary: | [SKL/KBL] Vblank counter issues when DMC takes goes to DC5/DC6 impacting frontbuffer tracking and PSR with X modesetting(0) driver. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | DRI | Reporter: | Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi> |
Component: | DRM/Intel | Assignee: | Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan> |
Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | Intel GFX Bugs mailing list <intel-gfx-bugs> |
Severity: | major | ||
Priority: | high | CC: | dhinakaran.pandiyan, intel-gfx-bugs, rodrigo.vivi, tjaalton |
Version: | DRI git | ||
Hardware: | Other | ||
OS: | Linux (All) | ||
Whiteboard: | ReadyForDev | ||
i915 platform: | KBL, SKL | i915 features: | display/PSR, power/Other |
Description
Rodrigo Vivi
2016-02-12 20:05:41 UTC
Any news on this? We'd like to migrate gen9+ to use modesetting instead.. Increasing priority due to current platform experience impact this seems to be working fine for me now, tested on KBL first with 4.6 (bad) and then 4.7 (good) and at least SKL broken again with PSR enabled on 4.8 Timo, Rodrigo - any new news on this? Tested 4.10 on SKL & KBL, both still busted. I want to do a run with vblank debug messages turned on to ensure that my understanding of what's going on here is correct, but from looking at the code I think we should be able to handle this case (where we lose the HW vblank count due to a power management event) similarly to what would happen if the counter wrapped around. We'll likely want to modify drm_update_vblank_count() to ensure that DRM's software counter gets adjusted properly when we lose our HW counter. Adding tag into "Whiteboard" field - ReadyForDev The bug still active *Status is correct *Platform is included *Feature is included *Priority and Severity correctly set (In reply to Jim Bride from comment #7) > I want to do a run with vblank debug messages turned on to ensure that my > understanding of what's going on here is correct, but from looking at the > code I think we should be able to handle this case (where we lose the HW > vblank count due to a power management event) similarly to what would happen > if the counter wrapped around. We'll likely want to modify > drm_update_vblank_count() to ensure that DRM's software counter gets adjusted > properly when we lose our HW counter. Good afternoon, Is there any update on this case? Thank you. I'm in the process of writing an IGT test to verify a set of patches that Rodrigo wrote last year that should address this issue. During patch reviews an IGT test was requested for this case. (In reply to Jim Bride from comment #10) > I'm in the process of writing an IGT test to verify a set of patches that > Rodrigo wrote last year that should address this issue. During patch > reviews an IGT test was requested for this case. Then shouldn't we move this case to IGT component? Thank you. First of all. Sorry about spam. This is mass update for our bugs. Sorry if you feel this annoying but with this trying to understand if bug still valid or not. If bug investigation still in progress, please ignore this and I apologize! If you think this is not anymore valid, please comment to the bug that can be closed. If you haven't tested with our latest pre-upstream tree(drm-tip), can you do that also to see if issue is valid there still and if you cannot see issue there, please comment to the bug. Rodrigo, DK, is this still valid? This was fixed with 2e8bf22 drm/i915: Estimate and update missed vblanks. d0bb96b drm/vblank: Restoring vblank counts after device PM events. 68036b0 drm/vblank: Do not update vblank count if interrupts are already disabled. f4c0468 drm/atomic: Handle 64-bit return from drm_crtc_vblank_count() 3abe241 drm/tegra: Handle 64-bit return from drm_crtc_vblank_count() 9038aa4 drm/radeon: Handle 64-bit return from drm_crtc_vblank_count() 23effc1 drm/amdgpu: Handle 64-bit return from drm_crtc_vblank_count() 1b29b7c drm/i915: Handle 64-bit return from drm_crtc_vblank_count() 734cbbf drm/i915/vblank: Make the vblank counter u64 -> u32 typecast explicit 3b765c0 drm/vblank: Data type fixes for 64-bit vblank sequences. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.