We haven't yet implemented support for backlights that need to be
enabled/disabled via PWM instead of AUX, which means we'll break things if
we enable DPCD backlight control on these machines. Luckily though since
most of these machines work fine just using the plain PWM backlight
controls anyway, there shouldn't be any issue with just leaving DPCD
backlight controls disabled in such situations.
This should fix the issues with PWM being left on that were being observed
on fi-bdw-samus.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Fixes: 4a8d79901d ("drm/i915/dp: Enable Intel's HDR backlight interface (only SDR for now)")
Testcase: igt/gem_exec_suspend/basic-s0 # fi-bdw-samus
Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210121183644.2627282-1-lyude@redhat.com
Since we now support controlling panel backlights through DPCD using
both the standard VESA interface, and Intel's proprietary HDR backlight
interface, we should allow the user to be able to explicitly choose
between one or the other in the event that we're wrong about panels
reliably reporting support for the Intel HDR interface.
So, this commit adds support for this by introducing two new
enable_dpcd_backlight options: 2 which forces i915 to only probe for the
VESA interface, and 3 which forces i915 to only probe for the Intel
backlight interface (might be useful if we find panels in the wild that
report the VESA interface in their VBT, but actually only support the
Intel backlight interface).
v3:
* Rebase
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: thaytan@noraisin.net
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210114221709.2261452-5-lyude@redhat.com
So-recently a bunch of laptops on the market have started using DPCD
backlight controls instead of the traditional DDI backlight controls.
Originally we thought we had this handled by adding VESA backlight
control support to i915, but the story ended up being a lot more
complicated then that.
Simply put-there's two main backlight interfaces Intel can see in the
wild. Intel's proprietary HDR backlight interface, and the standard VESA
backlight interface. Note that many panels have been observed to report
support for both backlight interfaces, but testing has shown far more
panels work with the Intel HDR backlight interface at the moment.
Additionally, the VBT appears to be capable of reporting support for the
VESA backlight interface but not the Intel HDR interface which needs to
be probed by setting the right magic OUI.
On top of that however, there's also actually two different variants of
the Intel HDR backlight interface. The first uses the AUX channel for
controlling the brightness of the screen in both SDR and HDR mode, and
the second only uses the AUX channel for setting the brightness level in
HDR mode - relying on PWM for setting the brightness level in SDR mode.
For the time being we've been using EDIDs to maintain a list of quirks
for panels that safely do support the VESA backlight interface. Adding
support for Intel's HDR backlight interface in addition however, should
finally allow us to auto-detect eDP backlight controls properly so long
as we probe like so:
* If the panel's VBT reports VESA backlight support, assume it really
does support it
* If the panel's VBT reports DDI backlight controls:
* First probe for Intel's HDR backlight interface
* If that fails, probe for VESA's backlight interface
* If that fails, assume no DPCD backlight control
* If the panel's VBT reports any other backlight type: just assume it
doesn't have DPCD backlight controls
Changes since v4:
* Fix checkpatch issues
Changes since v3:
* Stop using drm_device and use drm_i915_private instead
* Don't forget to return from intel_dp_aux_hdr_get_backlight() if we fail
to read the current backlight mode from the DPCD
* s/uint8_t/u8/
* Remove unneeded parenthesis in intel_dp_aux_hdr_enable_backlight()
* Use drm_dbg_kms() in intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs()
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: thaytan@noraisin.net
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210114221709.2261452-4-lyude@redhat.com
In the next commit where we split PWM related backlight functions from
higher-level backlight functions, we'll want to be able to retrieve the
backlight level for the current display panel from the
intel_panel_bl_funcs->setup() function using pwm_funcs->get(). Since
intel_panel_bl_funcs->setup() is called before we've fully read in the
current hardware state into our atomic state, we can't grab atomic
modesetting locks safely anyway in intel_panel_bl_funcs->setup(), and some
PWM backlight functions (vlv_get_backlight() in particular) require knowing
the currently used pipe we need to be able to discern the current display
pipe through other means. Luckily, we're already passing the current
display pipe to intel_panel_bl_funcs->setup() so all we have to do in order
to achieve this is pass down that parameter to intel_panel_bl_funcs->get().
So, fix this by accepting an additional pipe parameter in
intel_panel_bl_funcs->get(), and leave figuring out the current display
pipe up to the caller.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210114221709.2261452-2-lyude@redhat.com
No functional changes yet, this just adds definitions for all of the
known DPCD registers used by Intel's HDR backlight interface. Since
we'll only ever use this in i915, we just define them in
intel_dp_aux_backlight.c
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: thaytan@noraisin.net
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20201204223603.249878-7-lyude@redhat.com
Since we're about to add support for a second type of backlight control
interface over DP AUX (specifically, Intel's proprietary HDR backlight
controls) let's rename all of the current backlight hooks we have for
vesa to make it clear that they're specific to the VESA interface and
not Intel's.
v3:
* Rebase
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: thaytan@noraisin.net
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20201204223603.249878-6-lyude@redhat.com
Instead of using intel_panel->backlight.level, have the caller provide us
with the current panel backlight value. We'll need this for when we
separate PWM-related backlight callbacks from other means of backlight
control (like DPCD backlight controls), as the caller of each PWM callback
will be responsible for converting the current brightness value to it's
respective PWM level.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20201204223603.249878-4-lyude@redhat.com
This moves the functions into static const instead of having
funcs and data in the same struct.
It leaves the power callback alone, as it is used in a different
manner.
v2: leave power callback alone (Jani)
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20201130210945.31850-1-airlied@gmail.com
BOE panel with ID 2270 claims both PWM_PIN_CAP and AUX_SET_CAP backlight
control bits, but default chip backlight failed to control brightness.
Check AUX_SET_CAP and proceed to check quirks or VBT backlight type.
DPCD can control the brightness of this pannel.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Ma <aaron.ma@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20201009085750.88490-1-aaron.ma@canonical.com
In commit 7994672309 ("drm/i915: Assume 100% brightness when not in
DPCD control mode"), we fixed the brightness level when DPCD control was
not active to max brightness. This is as good as we can guess since most
backlights go on full when uncontrolled.
However in doing so we changed the semantics of the initial
'backlight.enabled' value. At least on Pixelbooks, they were relying
on the brightness level in DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_BRIGHTNESS_MSB to be 0 on
boot such that enabled would be false. This causes the device to be
enabled when the brightness is set. Without this, brightness control
doesn't work. So by changing brightness to max, we also flipped enabled
to be true on boot.
To fix this, make enabled a function of brightness and backlight control
mechanism.
Fixes: 7994672309 ("drm/i915: Assume 100% brightness when not in DPCD control mode")
Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Juha-Pekka Heikkila <juhapekka.heikkila@gmail.com>
Cc: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: Kevin Chowski <chowski@chromium.org>>
Signed-off-by: Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200918002845.32766-1-sean@poorly.run
Start using device specific parameters instead of module parameters for
most things. The module parameters become the immutable initial values
for i915 parameters. The device specific parameters in i915->params
start life as a copy of i915_modparams. Any later changes are only
reflected in the debugfs.
The stragglers are:
* i915.force_probe and i915.modeset. Needed before dev_priv is
available. This is fine because the parameters are read-only and never
modified.
* i915.verbose_state_checks. Passing dev_priv to I915_STATE_WARN and
I915_STATE_WARN_ON would result in massive and ugly churn. This is
handled by not exposing the parameter via debugfs, and leaving the
parameter writable in sysfs. This may be fixed up in follow-up work.
* i915.inject_probe_failure. Only makes sense in terms of the module,
not the device. This is handled by not exposing the parameter via
debugfs.
v2: Fix uc i915 lookup code (Michał Winiarski)
Cc: Juha-Pekka Heikkilä <juha-pekka.heikkila@intel.com>
Cc: Venkata Sandeep Dhanalakota <venkata.s.dhanalakota@intel.com>
Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Acked-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200618150402.14022-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
Looks like I accidentally made it so you couldn't force DPCD backlight
support on, whoops. Fix that.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Fixes: 17f5d57915 ("drm/i915: Force DPCD backlight mode on X1 Extreme 2nd Gen 4K AMOLED panel")
Cc: Adam Jackson <ajax@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200413214407.1851002-1-lyude@redhat.com
The X1 Extreme is one of the systems that lies about which backlight
interface that it uses in its VBIOS as PWM backlight controls don't work
at all on this machine. It's possible that this panel could be one of
the infamous ones that can switch between PWM mode and DPCD backlight
control mode, but we haven't gotten any more details on this from Lenovo
just yet. For the time being though, making sure the backlight 'just
works' is a bit more important.
So, add a quirk to force DPCD backlight controls on for these systems
based on EDID (since this panel doesn't appear to fill in the device ID).
Hopefully in the future we'll figure out a better way of probing this.
Changes since v2:
* The bugzilla URL is deprecated, bug reporting happens on gitlab now.
Update the messages we print to reflect this
* Also, take the opportunity to move FDO_BUG_URL out of i915_utils.c and
into i915_utils.h so that other places which print things that aren't
traditional errors but are worth filing bugs about, can actually use
it.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Jackson <ajax@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200303215320.93491-1-lyude@redhat.com
This reverts commit d2a4bb6f8b.
So, turns out that this ended up just breaking things. While many
laptops incorrectly advertise themselves as supporting PWM backlight
controls, they actually will only work with DPCD backlight controls.
Unfortunately, it also seems there are a number of systems which
advertise DPCD backlight controls in their eDP DPCD but don't actually
support them. Talking with some laptop manufacturers has shown it might
be possible to probe this support via the EDID (!?!?) but I haven't been
able to confirm that this would work on any other manufacturer's
systems.
So in the mean time, we'll just revert this commit for now and go back
to the old way of doing things.
Fixes: d2a4bb6f8b ("drm/i915: Don't use VBT for detecting DPCD backlight controls")
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200204192823.111404-2-lyude@redhat.com
Despite the fact that the VBT appears to have a field for specifying
that a system is equipped with a panel that supports standard VESA
backlight controls over the DP AUX channel, so far every system we've
spotted DPCD backlight control support on doesn't actually set this
field correctly and all have it set to INTEL_BACKLIGHT_DISPLAY_DDI.
While we don't know the exact reason for this VBT misuse, talking with
some vendors indicated that there's a good number of laptop panels out
there that supposedly support both PWM backlight controls and DPCD
backlight controls as a workaround until Intel supports DPCD backlight
controls across platforms universally. This being said, the X1 Extreme
2nd Gen that I have here (note that Lenovo is not the hardware vendor
that informed us of this) PWM backlight controls are advertised, but
only DPCD controls actually function. I'm going to make an educated
guess here and say that on systems like this one, it's likely that PWM
backlight controls might have been intended to work but were never
really tested by QA.
Since we really need backlights to work without any extra module
parameters, let's take the risk here and rely on the standard DPCD caps
to tell us whether AUX backlight controls are supported or not. We still
check the VBT, just so we can print a debugging message on systems that
advertise DPCD backlight support on the panel but not in the VBT.
Changes since v3:
* Print a debugging message if we enable DPCD backlight control on a
device which doesn't report DPCD backlight controls in it's VBT,
instead of warning on custom panel backlight interfaces.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112376
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Perry Yuan <pyuan@redhat.com>
Cc: AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200117232155.135579-1-lyude@redhat.com
For eDP panels, it appears it's expected that so long as the panel is in
DPCD control mode that the brightness value is never set to 0. Instead,
if the desired effect is to set the panel's backlight to 0 we're
expected to simply turn off the backlight through the
DP_EDP_DISPLAY_CONTROL_REGISTER.
We already do the latter correctly in intel_dp_aux_disable_backlight().
But, we make the mistake of writing the DPCD registers in the wrong
order when enabling the backlight in intel_dp_aux_enable_backlight()
since we currently enable the backlight through
DP_EDP_DISPLAY_CONTROL_REGISTER before writing the brightness level. On
the X1 Extreme 2nd Generation, this appears to have the potential of
confusing the panel in such a way that further attempts to set the
brightness don't actually change the backlight as expected and leave it
off. Presumably, this happens because the incorrect register writing
order briefly leaves the panel with DPCD mode enabled and a 0 brightness
level set.
So, reverse the order we write the DPCD registers when enabling the
panel backlight so that we write the brightness value first, and enable
the backlight second. This fix appears to be the final bit needed to get
the backlight on the ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2nd Generation's AMOLED screen
working.
Tested-by: AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@canonical.com>
Tested-by: Perry Yuan <pyuan@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200116211623.53799-4-lyude@redhat.com
Currently we always determine the initial panel brightness level by
simply reading the value from DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_BRIGHTNESS_MSB/LSB. This
seems wrong though, because if the panel is not currently in DPCD
control mode there's not really any reason why there would be any
brightness value programmed in the first place.
This appears to be the case on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2nd
Generation, where the default value in these registers is always 0 on
boot despite the fact the panel runs at max brightness by default.
Getting the initial brightness value correct here is important as well,
since the panel on this laptop doesn't behave well if it's ever put into
DPCD control mode while the brightness level is programmed to 0.
So, let's fix this by checking what the current backlight control mode
is before reading the brightness level. If it's in DPCD control mode, we
return the programmed brightness level. Otherwise we assume 100%
brightness and return the highest possible brightness level. This also
prevents us from accidentally programming a brightness level of 0.
This is one of the many fixes that gets backlight controls working on
the ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2nd Generation with optional 4K AMOLED screen.
Changes since v1:
* s/DP_EDP_DISPLAY_CONTROL_REGISTER/DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_MODE_SET_REGISTER/
- Jani
Tested-by: AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@canonical.com>
Tested-by: Perry Yuan <pyuan@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200116211623.53799-3-lyude@redhat.com
Max backlight value for the panel was being calculated using byte
count i.e. 0xffff if 2 bytes are supported for backlight brightness
and 0xff if 1 byte is supported. However, EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT
determines the number of active control bits used for the brightness
setting. Thus, even if the panel uses 2 byte setting, it might not use
all the control bits. Thus, max backlight should be set based on the
value of EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT instead of assuming 65535 or 255.
Additionally, EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT was being updated based on the VBT
frequency which results in a different max backlight value. Thus,
setting of EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT is moved to setup phase instead of
enable so that max backlight can be calculated correctly. Only the
frequency divider is set during the enable phase using the value of
EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT.
This is based off the original patch series from Furquan Shaikh
<furquan@google.com>:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/317255/?series=62326&rev=3
Changes since original patch:
* Remove unused intel_dp variable in intel_dp_aux_setup_backlight()
* Fix checkpatch issues
* Make sure that we rewrite the pwmgen bit count whenever we bring the
panel out of D3 mode
v2 by Jani:
* rebase
* fix readb return value check
Cc: Furquan Shaikh <furquan@google.com>
Tested-by: AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@canonical.com>
Tested-by: Perry Yuan <pyuan@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200116211623.53799-2-lyude@redhat.com
Everything about the file is about display, and mostly about types
related to display. Move under display/ as intel_display_types.h to
reflect the facts.
There's still plenty to clean up, but start off with moving the file
where it logically belongs and naming according to contents.
v2: fix the include guard name in the renamed file
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190806113933.11799-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
If LFP backlight type setting from VBT was "VESA eDP AUX Interface".
Driver should check panel capability and try to initialize aux backlight.
No matter i915_modparams.enable_dpcd_backlight was enabled or not.
v2: access dev_priv->vbt.backlight.type directly and remove unused function.
v3: 1. Modify i915.enable_dpcd_backlight type from bool to int and give default
value as 0 (disable).
2. Add a judgement to check LFP backlight type was aux interface or not.
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Jose Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
Cc: Cooper Chiou <cooper.chiou@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Lee Shawn C <shawn.c.lee@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1561045456-12171-1-git-send-email-shawn.c.lee@intel.com
Add a new subdirectory for display code, and start off by moving
modesetting output/encoder code. Judging by the include changes, this is
a surprisingly clean operation.
v2:
- move intel_sdvo_regs.h too
- use tabs for Makefile file lists and sort them
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Acked-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190613084416.6794-2-jani.nikula@intel.com
2019-06-17 11:25:06 +03:00
Renamed from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp_aux_backlight.c (Browse further)
