With multi panel machines becoming more prominent it's also
important to know which connector's backlight we're talking
about. Include that information in all the backlight debug/error
messages.
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20230215140021.2843-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
It's confusing to debug backlight issues when one can't
easily even tell what kind of backlight control was
selected. Sprinkle uniform debug messages to all the
backlight setup functions.
Also the one that was already there (ext_pwm) was
using drm_info() for some reason. I don't think that's
warranted so switch it to drm_dbg_kms() as well.
v2: Deal with AUX backlights too (Jani)
Move the VLV/CHV initial pipe debug there too (Jani)
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20230215135616.30411-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Instead of using fixed 0 - 512 range use luminance range calculated
as a part of edid parsing. As a backup fall back to static 0 - 512.
v3: Clean-ups suggested by Jani Nikula
v2: Use values calculated during edid parsing
Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20220719095700.14923-4-jouni.hogander@intel.com
Move the panel specific VBT parsing to happen during the
output probing stage. Needs to be done because the VBT
parsing will need to look at the EDID to determine
the correct panel_type on some machines.
We split the parsed VBT data (i915->vbt) along the same
boundary. For the moment we just hoist all the panel
specific stuff into connector->panel.vbt since that seems
like the most convenient place for eg. the backlight code.
Note that we simply drop the drrs type check from
intel_drrs_frontbuffer_update() since that operates on the whole
device rather than a specific connector/encoder. But the check
was just a micro optimization so removing it doesn't actually
mattter for correctness.
TODO: Lot's of cleanup to be done in the future. Eg. most of
the DSI stuff could probably be eliminated entirely and just
parsed on demand during DSI init.
v2: Note the intel_drrs_frontbuffer_update() change
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20220510104242.6099-13-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
We have now seen panel (XMG Core 15 e21 laptop) advertizing support
for Intel proprietary eDP backlight control via DPCD registers, but
actually working only with legacy pwm control.
This patch adds panel EDID check for possible HDR static metadata and
Intel proprietary eDP backlight control is used only if that exists.
Missing HDR static metadata is ignored if user specifically asks for
Intel proprietary eDP backlight control via enable_dpcd_backlight
parameter.
v2 :
- Ignore missing HDR static metadata if Intel proprietary eDP
backlight control is forced via i915.enable_dpcd_backlight
- Printout info message if panel is missing HDR static metadata and
support for Intel proprietary eDP backlight control is detected
Fixes: 4a8d79901d ("drm/i915/dp: Enable Intel's HDR backlight interface (only SDR for now)")
Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5284
Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Filippo Falezza <filippo.falezza@outlook.it>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jouni Högander <jouni.hogander@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20220413082826.120634-1-jouni.hogander@intel.com
Reviewed-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
While working on supporting the Intel HDR backlight interface, I noticed
that there's a couple of laptops that will very rarely manage to boot up
without detecting Intel HDR backlight support - even though it's supported
on the system. One example of such a laptop is the Lenovo P17 1st
generation.
Following some investigation Ville Syrjälä did through the docs they have
available to them, they discovered that there's actually supposed to be a
30ms wait after writing the source OUI before we begin setting up the rest
of the backlight interface.
This seems to be correct, as adding this 30ms delay seems to have
completely fixed the probing issues I was previously seeing. So - let's
start performing a 30ms wait after writing the OUI, which we do in a manner
similar to how we keep track of PPS delays (e.g. record the timestamp of
the OUI write, and then wait for however many ms are left since that
timestamp right before we interact with the backlight) in order to avoid
waiting any longer then we need to. As well, this also avoids us performing
this delay on systems where we don't end up using the HDR backlight
interface.
V3:
* Move last_oui_write into intel_dp
V2:
* Move panel delays into intel_pps
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Fixes: 4a8d79901d ("drm/i915/dp: Enable Intel's HDR backlight interface (only SDR for now)")
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.12+
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20211130212912.212044-1-lyude@redhat.com
Hooray! We've managed to hit enough bugs upstream that I've been able to
come up with a pretty solid explanation for how backlight controls are
actually supposed to be detected and used these days. As well, having the
rest of the PWM bits in VESA's backlight interface implemented seems to
have fixed all of the problematic brightness controls laptop panels that
we've hit so far.
So, let's actually document this instead of just calling the laptop panels
liars. As well, I would like to formally apologize to all of the laptop
panels I called liars. I'm sorry laptop panels, hopefully you can all
forgive me and we can move past this~
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20211105183342.130810-6-lyude@redhat.com
Now that we've added support to i915 for controlling panel backlights that
need PWM to be enabled/disabled, let's finalize this and add support for
controlling brightness levels via PWM as well. This should hopefully put us
towards the path of supporting _ALL_ backlights via VESA's DPCD interface
which would allow us to finally start trusting the DPCD again.
Note however that we still don't enable using this by default on i915 when
it's not needed, primarily because I haven't yet had a chance to confirm if
it's safe to do this on the one machine in Intel's CI that had an issue
with this: samus-fi-bdw. I have done basic testing of this on other
machines though, by manually patching i915 to force it into PWM-only mode
on some of my laptops.
v2:
* Correct documentation (thanks Doug!)
* Get rid of backlight caps
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Rajeev Nandan <rajeevny@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Satadru Pramanik <satadru@gmail.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20211105183342.130810-5-lyude@redhat.com
This simply adds proper support for panel backlights that can be controlled
via VESA's backlight control protocol, but which also require that we
enable and disable the backlight via PWM instead of via the DPCD interface.
We also enable this by default, in order to fix some people's backlights
that were broken by not having this enabled.
For reference, backlights that require this and use VESA's backlight
interface tend to be laptops with hybrid GPUs, but this very well may
change in the future.
v4:
* Make sure that we call intel_backlight_level_to_pwm() in
intel_dp_aux_vesa_enable_backlight() - vsyrjala
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3680
Fixes: fe7d52bcca ("drm/i915/dp: Don't use DPCD backlights that need PWM enable/disable")
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.12+
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20211105183342.130810-2-lyude@redhat.com
Since we're about to implement eDP backlight support in nouveau using the
standard protocol from VESA, we might as well just take the code that's
already written for this and move it into a set of shared DRM helpers.
Note that these helpers are intended to handle DPCD related backlight
control bits such as setting the brightness level over AUX, probing the
backlight's TCON, enabling/disabling the backlight over AUX if supported,
etc. Any PWM-related portions of backlight control are explicitly left up
to the driver, as these will vary from platform to platform.
The only exception to this is the calculation of the PWM frequency
pre-divider value. This is because the only platform-specific information
required for this is the PWM frequency of the panel, which the driver is
expected to provide if available. The actual algorithm for calculating this
value is standard and is defined in the eDP specification from VESA.
Note that these helpers do not yet implement the full range of features
the VESA backlight interface provides, and only provide the following
functionality (all of which was already present in i915's DPCD backlight
support):
* Basic control of brightness levels
* Basic probing of backlight capabilities
* Helpers for enabling and disabling the backlight
v3:
* Split out changes to i915's backlight code to separate patches to make it
easier to review
v4:
* Style/spelling changes from Thomas Zimmermann
v5:
* Start using new drm_dbg_*() functions
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Cc: greg.depoire@gmail.com
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-9-lyude@redhat.com
Also, stop printing the DPCD register that failed, and just describe it
instead. Saves us from having to look up each register offset when reading
through kernel logs (plus, DPCD dumping with drm.debug |= 0x100 will give
us that anyway).
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-8-lyude@redhat.com
If we can't read DP_EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT in
intel_dp_aux_vesa_calc_max_backlight() but do have a valid PWM frequency
defined in the VBT, we'll keep going in the function until we inevitably
fail on reading DP_EDP_PWMGEN_BIT_COUNT_CAP_MIN. There's not much point in
doing this, so just return early.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-7-lyude@redhat.com
Since we're about to be moving this code into shared DRM helpers, we might
as well start to cache certain backlight capabilities that can be
determined from the EDP DPCD, and are likely to be relevant to the majority
of drivers using said helpers. The main purpose of this is just to prevent
every driver from having to check everything against the eDP DPCD using DP
macros, which makes the code slightly easier to read (especially since the
names of some of the eDP capabilities don't exactly match up with what we
actually need to use them for, like DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_BRIGHTNESS_BYTE_COUNT
for instance).
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-5-lyude@redhat.com
Get rid of the extraneous switch case in here, and just open code
edp_backlight_mode as we only ever use it once.
v4:
* Check that backlight mode is DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_CONTROL_MODE_DPCD, not
DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_CONTROL_MODE_MASK - imirkin
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-4-lyude@redhat.com
This is kind of an annoying aspect of DRM's DP helpers:
drm_dp_dpcd_readb/writeb() return the size of bytes read/written on
success, thus we want to check against that instead of checking if the
return value is less than 0.
I'll probably be fixing this in the near future once I start doing DP work
again, also because I'd rather not mix a tree-wide refactor like that in
with a patch series intended to be around introducing DP backlight helpers.
So, for now let's just handle the return values from each function
correctly.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-3-lyude@redhat.com
Noticed this while moving all of the VESA backlight code in i915 over to
DRM helpers: it would appear that we calculate the frequency value we want
to write to DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_FREQ_SET twice even though this value never
actually changes during runtime. So, let's simplify things by just caching
this value in intel_panel.backlight, and re-writing it as-needed.
Changes since v1:
* Wrap panel->backlight.edp.vesa.pwm_freq_pre_divider in
DP_EDP_BACKLIGHT_FREQ_AUX_SET_CAP check - Jani
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Cc: greg.depoire@gmail.com
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210514181504.565252-2-lyude@redhat.com
Looks like that there actually are another subset of laptops on the market
that don't support the Intel HDR backlight interface, but do advertise
support for the VESA DPCD backlight interface despite the fact it doesn't
seem to work.
Note though I'm not entirely clear on this - on one of the machines where
this issue was observed, I also noticed that we appeared to be rejecting
the VBT defined backlight frequency in
intel_dp_aux_vesa_calc_max_backlight(). It's noted in this function that:
/* Use highest possible value of Pn for more granularity of brightness
* adjustment while satifying the conditions below.
* ...
* - FxP is within 25% of desired value.
* Note: 25% is arbitrary value and may need some tweak.
*/
So it's possible that this value might just need to be tweaked, but for now
let's just disable the VESA backlight interface unless it's specified in
the VBT just to be safe. We might be able to try enabling this again by
default in the future.
Fixes: 2227816e64 ("drm/i915/dp: Allow forcing specific interfaces through enable_dpcd_backlight")
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Bugzilla: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3169
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210318170204.513000-1-lyude@redhat.com
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)
