similar to: [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/nouveau/kms/nv50-: Program notifier offset before requesting disp caps

Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd 008c data 00000000 0000508c 0000102b This is magic nvidia speak for "You need to have the DMA notifier

These didn't apply cleanly to v5.8, so here's a backported version. Lyude Paul (2): drm/nouveau/kms/nv50-: Program notifier offset before requesting disp caps drm/nouveau/kms/nv50-: Log SOR/PIOR caps drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/core507d.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++----- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c | 10 +++++++++ 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd 008c data 00000000 0000508c 0000102b This is magic nvidia speak for "You need to have the DMA notifier

Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd 008c data 00000000 0000508c 0000102b This is magic nvidia speak for "You need to have the DMA notifier

Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd 008c data 00000000 0000508c 0000102b This is magic nvidia speak for "You need to have the DMA notifier

Currently, nouveau doesn't actually bother to try probing whether or not it can actually handle interlaced modes over DisplayPort. As a result, on volta and later we'll end up trying to set an interlaced mode even when it's not supported and cause the front end for the display engine to hang. So, let's teach nouveau to reject interlaced modes on hardware that can't actually

Currently, nouveau doesn't actually bother to try probing whether or not it can actually handle interlaced modes over DisplayPort. As a result, on volta and later we'll end up trying to set an interlaced mode even when it's not supported and cause the front end for the display engine to hang. So, let's teach nouveau to reject interlaced modes on hardware that can't actually

On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 04:33, Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote: > > Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this > (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc > appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver > init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: > > nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 02:52, Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 08:28 +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 04:33, Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote: > > > Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this > > > (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc

Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver init, at least on my ThinkPad P72: nouveau 0000:01:00.0: disp: chid 0 mthd 008c data 00000000 0000508c 0000102b This is magic nvidia speak for "You need to have the DMA notifier

I ran into this issue on a gm204 GPU with a display reporting interlaced modes. Nvidia dropped those modelines for DP, but not HDMI. We should do the same on hardware where interlaced modes aren't supported via DP. Signed-off-by: Karol Herbst <kherbst at redhat.com> --- drm/nouveau/dispnv50/core.h | 10 ++++++++++ drm/nouveau/dispnv50/core507d.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 08:28 +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote: > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 04:33, Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote: > > Not entirely sure why this never came up when I originally tested this > > (maybe some BIOSes already have this setup?) but the ->caps_init vfunc > > appears to cause the display engine to throw an exception on driver > > init, at

This is mainly for dropping interlaced modes on DP connectors if the GPU would otherwise display garbage or EVO timesout. It also adds experimental detection of the HDMI clock limit we currently hard limit depending on the GPU generation. Starting with GF110 GPUs, we can retrieve the limit directly from the GPU and may make the hdmimhz parameter obsolete. Testing this series with 2560x1440 or

small update to my last version I sent out. Patches 3-6 are optional and should only improve detecting the max clocks for HDMI and DP, but they didn't underwent big testing and I am a bit concerned, that it might break detecting the DP limits on some boards. Karol Herbst (6): kms/nv50: move nv50_mstm out of the dp union in nouveau_encoder kms/nv50: reject interlaced modes if the hardware

Noticed these in both the disable (which we'll be getting rid of in a moment) and the atomic disable callbacks: both callback types check whether or not there's actually a CRTC assigned to the given encoder. However, as ->atomic_disable and ->disable will never be called without a CRTC assigned to the given encoder there's no point in this check. So just remove it.

Just two CRC related fixes for the new CRC functionality in 5.9. One of these unbreaks CRC reporting on volta+, which accidentally got broken when converting over to nvidia's class headers. The other simply removes an unneeded CRC method call that's been hiding in head907d_mode() for quite a while now. Lyude Paul (2): drm/nouveau/kms/nv140-: Include correct push header in crcc37d.c

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both