drm/rockchip: vop: check mode_valid by total pixels #156
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Currently the function will reject vertical displays. Changed to test total pixels instead. Signed-off-by: ZHANG Yuntian <yt@radxa.com>
|
@Radxa-Alvin has tested this PR and it worked for a RK356X system. |
|
@Radxa-Alvin 这个pr的内容是不是包含在了上次的默认分辨率修复pr里面？ |
|
上次的PR没有包含这个修改 |
|
Added to branch linux-5.10-gen-rkr4.1. |
ruiqurm
pushed a commit
to BUPT-OS/radxa-kernel
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 7, 2025
Checking for PI/PP boosting mutex is not enough when dropping to in-band context: owning any mutex in this case would be wrong, since this would create a priority inversion. Extend the logic of evl_detect_boost_drop() to encompass any owned mutex, renaming it to evl_check_no_mutex() for consistency. As a side-effect, the thread which attempts to switch in-band while owning mutex(es) now receives a single HMDIAG_LKDEPEND notification, instead of notifying all waiter(s) sleeping on those mutexes. As a consequence, we can drop detect_inband_owner() which becomes redundant as it detects the same issue from the converse side without extending the test coverage (i.e. a contender would check whether the mutex owner is running in-band). This change does affect the behavior for applications turning on T_WOLI on waiter threads explicitly. This said, the same issue would still be detected if CONFIG_EVL_DEBUG_WOLI is set globally though, which is the recommended configuration during the development stage. This change also solves an ABBA issue which existed in the former implementation: [ 40.976962] ====================================================== [ 40.976964] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected [ 40.976965] 5.15.77-00716-g8390add2f766 radxa#156 Not tainted [ 40.976968] ------------------------------------------------------ [ 40.976969] monitor-pp-lazy/363 is trying to acquire lock: [ 40.976971] ffff99c5c14e5588 (test363.0){....}-{0:0}, at: evl_detect_boost_drop+0x80/0x200 [ 40.976987] [ 40.976987] but task is already holding lock: [ 40.976988] ffff99c5c243d818 (monitor-pp-lazy:363){....}-{0:0}, at: evl_detect_boost_drop+0x0/0x200 [ 40.976996] [ 40.976996] which lock already depends on the new lock. [ 40.976996] [ 40.976997] [ 40.976997] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [ 40.976998] [ 40.976998] -> radxa#1 (monitor-pp-lazy:363){....}-{0:0}: [ 40.977003] fast_grab_mutex+0xca/0x150 [ 40.977006] evl_lock_mutex_timeout+0x60/0xa90 [ 40.977009] monitor_oob_ioctl+0x226/0xed0 [ 40.977014] EVL_ioctl+0x41/0xa0 [ 40.977017] handle_pipelined_syscall+0x3d8/0x490 [ 40.977021] __pipeline_syscall+0xcc/0x2e0 [ 40.977026] pipeline_syscall+0x47/0x120 [ 40.977030] syscall_enter_from_user_mode+0x40/0xa0 [ 40.977036] do_syscall_64+0x15/0xf0 [ 40.977039] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x61/0xcb [ 40.977044] [ 40.977044] -> #0 (test363.0){....}-{0:0}: [ 40.977048] __lock_acquire+0x133a/0x2530 [ 40.977053] lock_acquire+0xce/0x2d0 [ 40.977056] evl_detect_boost_drop+0xb0/0x200 [ 40.977059] evl_switch_inband+0x41e/0x540 [ 40.977064] do_oob_syscall+0x1bc/0x3d0 [ 40.977067] handle_pipelined_syscall+0xbe/0x490 [ 40.977071] __pipeline_syscall+0xcc/0x2e0 [ 40.977075] pipeline_syscall+0x47/0x120 [ 40.977079] syscall_enter_from_user_mode+0x40/0xa0 [ 40.977083] do_syscall_64+0x15/0xf0 [ 40.977086] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x61/0xcb [ 40.977090] [ 40.977090] other info that might help us debug this: [ 40.977090] [ 40.977091] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 40.977091] [ 40.977092] CPU0 CPU1 [ 40.977093] ---- ---- [ 40.977094] lock(monitor-pp-lazy:363); [ 40.977096] lock(test363.0); [ 40.977098] lock(monitor-pp-lazy:363); [ 40.977100] lock(test363.0); [ 40.977102] [ 40.977102] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 40.977102] [ 40.977103] 1 lock held by monitor-pp-lazy/363: [ 40.977105] #0: ffff99c5c243d818 (monitor-pp-lazy:363){....}-{0:0}, at: evl_detect_boost_drop+0x0/0x200 [ 40.977113] Signed-off-by: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently the function will reject vertical displays. Changed to test total pixels instead.
This has not been tested on real hardware.