On Fri Dec 20, 2024 at 1:13 AM CET, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:05:56PM +0800, Damon Ding wrote:
quoted
void analogix_dp_get_lane_count(struct analogix_dp_device *dp, u32 *count)
@@ -546,10 +575,37 @@ void analogix_dp_get_lane_count(struct analogix_dp_device *dp, u32 *count)
void analogix_dp_set_lane_link_training(struct analogix_dp_device *dp)
{
u8 lane;
+ int ret;
for (lane = 0; lane < dp->link_train.lane_count; lane++)
writel(dp->link_train.training_lane[lane],
dp->reg_base + ANALOGIX_DP_LN0_LINK_TRAINING_CTL + 4 * lane);
+
+ if (dp->phy) {
+ union phy_configure_opts phy_cfg = {0};
+
+ for (lane = 0; lane < dp->link_train.lane_count; lane++) {
+ u8 training_lane = dp->link_train.training_lane[lane];
+ u8 vs, pe;
+
+ vs = (training_lane & DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_MASK) >>
+ DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_SHIFT;
+ pe = (training_lane & DP_TRAIN_PRE_EMPHASIS_MASK) >>
+ DP_TRAIN_PRE_EMPHASIS_SHIFT;
+ phy_cfg.dp.voltage[lane] = vs;
+ phy_cfg.dp.pre[lane] = pe;
+ }
+
+ phy_cfg.dp.lanes = dp->link_train.lane_count;
+ phy_cfg.dp.link_rate =
+ drm_dp_bw_code_to_link_rate(dp->link_train.link_rate) / 100;
This two should not be necessary, please drop them.
This too or These two (statements)?
quoted
+ phy_cfg.dp.set_voltages = true;
+ ret = phy_configure(dp->phy, &phy_cfg);
+ if (ret && ret != -EOPNOTSUPP) {
+ dev_err(dp->dev, "%s: phy_configure() failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
+ return;
+ }
+ }
}
u32 analogix_dp_get_lane_link_training(struct analogix_dp_device *dp, u8 lane)
--
2.34.1