IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
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 79946723092b ("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: 79946723092b ("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: 17f5d57915be ("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 d2a4bb6f8bc8cf2d788adf7e59b5b52fe3a3333c.
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: d2a4bb6f8bc8 ("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
