search for: intel_lid_notify

...t __deprecated acpi_lid_open(void) { if (!lid_device) return -ENODEV; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) goto exit; - if (!acpi_lid_open()) { + if (!val) { /* do modeset on next lid open event */ dev_priv->modeset_restore =...

...oise to your list. The question is whether or not the kernel should provide a fake state for the _LID acpi call, and until we reach an agreement on how to handle things, there is no point changing the currently working code in i915. It is true that there is an issue in i915 regarding the fact that intel_lid_notify() doesn't use the provided value but calls acpi_lid_open(), but this is something that can be solved in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100923, when the situation clarifies. Cheers, Benjamin

...LID_INIT_IGNORE; pr_info("Do not notify initial lid state\n"); diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) goto exit; - if (!acpi_lid_open()) { + if (!val) { /* do modeset on next lid open event */ dev_priv->modeset_restore =...

...(!lid_device) > return -ENODEV; > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) > goto exit; > - if (!acpi_lid_open()) { > + if (!val) { >...

...her or not the kernel should provide a fake state > for the _LID acpi call, and until we reach an agreement on how to > handle things, there is no point changing the currently working code > in i915. Fair enough. > It is true that there is an issue in i915 regarding the fact that > intel_lid_notify() doesn't use the provided value but calls > acpi_lid_open(), but this is something that can be solved in > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100923, when the > situation clarifies. The snarky reply here might be that we're just following the documentation of acpi_lid_n...

...return -ENODEV; > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ > > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) > > goto exit; > > - if (!acpi_lid_open()) { > > + if...

...fo("Do not notify initial lid state\n"); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) > goto exit; > - if (!acpi_lid_open()) { > + if (!val) { > /* do modeset on next lid open event */ >...

...tel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> >> > > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 >> >> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> >> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> >> > > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, >> >> > > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ >> >> > > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) >> >> > > goto exit; >>...

...> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > > > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > > > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ > > > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) > > > goto exit; > > > - if (!acpi_lid_open()) {...

...diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> > > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 >> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c >> > > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, >> > > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ >> > > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) >> > > goto exit; >> > > - if (!acp...

.../gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > >> > > index 9ca4dc4..8ca9080 100644 > >> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > >> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lvds.c > >> > > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static int intel_lid_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, > >> > > /* Don't force modeset on machines where it causes a GPU lockup */ > >> > > if (dmi_check_system(intel_no_modeset_on_lid)) > >> > > goto exit; > >> > &...

Hi all, First thing first: It works, I now no longer have a few dropped frames every 10s on my testbox here with the pageflip i-g-t tests. Random notes: - New design has per-crtc locks to protect the crtc input-side (pageflip, cursor) for r/w and the output state of the crtc (mode, dpms) as read-only. It also required completely revamped fb lifecycle management, those are now refcounted