Bug 65329 - [ILK IVB regression S3] *ERROR* dp_aux_ch not done status 0xa01500e1, dp aux hw did not signal timeout (has irq: 1)!
Summary: [ILK IVB regression S3] *ERROR* dp_aux_ch not done status 0xa01500e1, dp aux ...
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: DRI
Classification: Unclassified
Component: DRM/Intel (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other All
: medium major
Assignee: Intel GFX Bugs mailing list
QA Contact: Intel GFX Bugs mailing list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-06-04 06:51 UTC by shui yangwei
Modified: 2016-10-03 09:05 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
i915 platform:
i915 features:

Attachments
dmesg: resume from S3, error messages (106.66 KB, text/plain)
2013-06-04 06:51 UTC, shui yangwei 		no flags Details
View All

Description shui yangwei 2013-06-04 06:51:41 UTC 
Created attachment 80265 [details]
dmesg: resume from S3, error messages

Environment:
-------------------
Kernel: (drm-intel-next-queued)d7697eea3eec74c561d12887d892c53ac4380c00
Some additional commit info:
Author: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Sun Jun 2 17:23:01 2013 +0200

    drm/i915: optimize vblank waits in set_base_atomic

Description:
-------------------
When resume from S3, I find there's some error messages in dmesg. If bisect is needed, please let me know. Thx. Detail errors list below:

[   23.804660] [drm:intel_dp_aux_wait_done] *ERROR* dp aux hw did not signal timeout (has irq: 1)!
[   23.814666] [drm:intel_dp_aux_wait_done] *ERROR* dp aux hw did not signal timeout (has irq: 1)!
[   23.824675] [drm:intel_dp_aux_wait_done] *ERROR* dp aux hw did not signal timeout (has irq: 1)!
[   23.824677] [drm:intel_dp_aux_ch] *ERROR* dp_aux_ch not done status 0xa01500e1


Reproduce Steps:
-------------------
1. only eDP plugged in
2. reboot
3. S3
4. resume by push power button
5. checkout dmesg
Comment 1 Daniel Vetter 2013-06-04 07:46:00 UTC 
Does this work correctly on -nightly, but fail on -next-queued?
Comment 2 shui yangwei 2013-06-04 07:54:44 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> Does this work correctly on -nightly, but fail on -next-queued?

This issue also exists on -nightly.
Comment 3 Chris Wilson 2013-06-07 18:15:28 UTC 
Believed to be the jiffy wait fixes.
Comment 4 shui yangwei 2013-06-27 01:52:02 UTC 
(In reply to comment #3)
> Believed to be the jiffy wait fixes.

In this round testing, this issue disappeared, I verified it here.
Comment 5 Jari Tahvanainen 2016-10-03 09:05:42 UTC 
Closing Verified+Fixed.

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.