On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 07:03:41PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
Add some of the new additions from DP 2.0 E11.
Cc: Uma Shankar uma.shankar@intel.com Cc: Ville Syrjälä ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula jani.nikula@intel.com
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
include/drm/dp/drm_dp_helper.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/drm/dp/drm_dp_helper.h b/include/drm/dp/drm_dp_helper.h index c499d735b992..69487bd8ed56 100644 --- a/include/drm/dp/drm_dp_helper.h +++ b/include/drm/dp/drm_dp_helper.h @@ -560,6 +560,7 @@ struct drm_panel; # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_DISABLE 0 # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_1 1 # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_2 2 +# define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_2_CDS 3 /* 2.0 E11 */ # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_3 3 /* 1.2 */ # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_4 7 /* 1.4 */ # define DP_TRAINING_PATTERN_MASK 0x3 @@ -1350,6 +1351,7 @@ struct drm_panel; # define DP_PHY_REPEATER_128B132B_SUPPORTED (1 << 0) /* See DP_128B132B_SUPPORTED_LINK_RATES for values */ #define DP_PHY_REPEATER_128B132B_RATES 0xf0007 /* 2.0 */ +#define DP_PHY_REPEATER_EQ_DONE 0xf0008 /* 2.0 E11 */
Wonder if we should look at that at some point? The spec doesn't really say so. Or maybe we should just dump it out of the link training failed?
enum drm_dp_phy { DP_PHY_DPRX, -- 2.30.2