mirror of
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2026-05-16 19:31:42 -04:00
drm/i915/backlight: Remove try_vesa_interface
Some panels need VESA DPCD AUX backlight but VBT says otherwise. This is why we try with Intel backlight interface over VESA backlight interface. This causes a blankout on such panels without any fallback mechanism. Remove try_vesa_interface and use VESA AUX backlight interface as a fallback mechanism. While at in sneak in a small comment cleanup too. Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/15679 Signed-off-by: Suraj Kandpal <suraj.kandpal@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260224031322.2568874-1-suraj.kandpal@intel.com
This commit is contained in:
@@ -644,9 +644,10 @@ int intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs(struct intel_connector *connector)
|
||||
struct intel_dp *intel_dp = intel_attached_dp(connector);
|
||||
struct drm_device *dev = connector->base.dev;
|
||||
struct intel_panel *panel = &connector->panel;
|
||||
bool try_intel_interface = false, try_vesa_interface = false;
|
||||
bool try_intel_interface = false;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Check the VBT and user's module parameters to figure out which
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Check the VBT and user's module parameters to figure out which
|
||||
* interfaces to probe
|
||||
*/
|
||||
switch (display->params.enable_dpcd_backlight) {
|
||||
@@ -655,7 +656,6 @@ int intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs(struct intel_connector *connector)
|
||||
case INTEL_DP_AUX_BACKLIGHT_AUTO:
|
||||
switch (panel->vbt.backlight.type) {
|
||||
case INTEL_BACKLIGHT_VESA_EDP_AUX_INTERFACE:
|
||||
try_vesa_interface = true;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case INTEL_BACKLIGHT_DISPLAY_DDI:
|
||||
try_intel_interface = true;
|
||||
@@ -668,20 +668,12 @@ int intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs(struct intel_connector *connector)
|
||||
if (panel->vbt.backlight.type != INTEL_BACKLIGHT_VESA_EDP_AUX_INTERFACE)
|
||||
try_intel_interface = true;
|
||||
|
||||
try_vesa_interface = true;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case INTEL_DP_AUX_BACKLIGHT_FORCE_VESA:
|
||||
try_vesa_interface = true;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case INTEL_DP_AUX_BACKLIGHT_FORCE_INTEL:
|
||||
try_intel_interface = true;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* For eDP 1.5 and above we are supposed to use VESA interface for brightness control */
|
||||
if (intel_dp->edp_dpcd[0] >= DP_EDP_15)
|
||||
try_vesa_interface = true;
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Since Intel has their own backlight control interface, the majority of machines out there
|
||||
* using DPCD backlight controls with Intel GPUs will be using this interface as opposed to
|
||||
@@ -694,6 +686,9 @@ int intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs(struct intel_connector *connector)
|
||||
* panel with Intel's OUI - which is also required for us to be able to detect Intel's
|
||||
* backlight interface at all. This means that the only sensible way for us to detect both
|
||||
* interfaces is to probe for Intel's first, and VESA's second.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Also there is a chance some VBTs may advertise false Intel backlight support even if the
|
||||
* TCON DPCD says otherwise. This means we keep VESA interface as fallback in that case.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (try_intel_interface && intel_dp_aux_supports_hdr_backlight(connector) &&
|
||||
intel_dp->edp_dpcd[0] <= DP_EDP_14b) {
|
||||
@@ -703,7 +698,7 @@ int intel_dp_aux_init_backlight_funcs(struct intel_connector *connector)
|
||||
return 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (try_vesa_interface && intel_dp_aux_supports_vesa_backlight(connector)) {
|
||||
if (intel_dp_aux_supports_vesa_backlight(connector)) {
|
||||
drm_dbg_kms(dev, "[CONNECTOR:%d:%s] Using VESA eDP backlight controls\n",
|
||||
connector->base.base.id, connector->base.name);
|
||||
panel->backlight.funcs = &intel_dp_vesa_bl_funcs;
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user