> Subject: [PATCH v2 04/10] drm/i915/alpm: Refactor Auxless wake time > calculation > > Divide the auxless wake time calculation in parts which will help later to add > Xe3p related modification. > > v1: Initial version.
No need for this you can start off with v2 directly Same for all patches where this has occured > v2: Refactor first existing calculation. [Jani] > Add Bspec link > Cc: Jouni Högander <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_alpm.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_alpm.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_alpm.c > index 779718d0c8dd..8d07455a62c2 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_alpm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_alpm.c > @@ -85,6 +85,26 @@ static int get_lfps_half_cycle_clocks(const struct > intel_crtc_state *crtc_state) > 1000 / (2 * LFPS_CYCLE_COUNT); > } > > +static int get_tphy2_p2_to_p0(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) { > + return 12 * 1000; > +} > + > +static int get_establishment_period(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > + const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state) { > + int port_clock = crtc_state->port_clock; > + int t1 = 50 * 1000; > + int tps4 = (252 * 10); Where did this * 10 come from? > + long tml_phy_lock = 1000 * 1000 * tps4 / port_clock / 10; Why the extra /10 required here also if you had not multiplied tps4 with 10 then this wouldn't be required You also removed the comment telling us portclock need to be in 10Kb/s > + int tcds, establishment_period; > + > + tcds = (7 + DIV_ROUND_UP(6500, tml_phy_lock) + 1) * tml_phy_lock; > + establishment_period = (SILENCE_PERIOD_TIME + t1 + tcds); > + > + return establishment_period; > +} > + > /* > * AUX-Less Wake Time = CEILING( ((PHY P2 to P0) + tLFPS_Period, Max+ > * tSilence, Max+ tPHY Establishment + tCDS) / tline) @@ -104,19 +124,14 > @@ static int get_lfps_half_cycle_clocks(const struct intel_crtc_state > *crtc_state) > * tML_PHY_LOCK = TPS4 Length * ( 10 / (Link Rate in MHz) ) > * TPS4 Length = 252 Symbols > */ > -static int _lnl_compute_aux_less_wake_time(const struct intel_crtc_state > *crtc_state) > +static int _lnl_compute_aux_less_wake_time(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > + const struct intel_crtc_state I don’t see any justified reason to send intel_dp here Regards, Suraj Kandpal > *crtc_state) > { > - int tphy2_p2_to_p0 = 12 * 1000; > - int t1 = 50 * 1000; > - int tps4 = 252; > - /* port_clock is link rate in 10kbit/s units */ > - int tml_phy_lock = 1000 * 1000 * tps4 / crtc_state->port_clock; > - int num_ml_phy_lock = 7 + DIV_ROUND_UP(6500, tml_phy_lock) + 1; > - int t2 = num_ml_phy_lock * tml_phy_lock; > - int tcds = 1 * t2; > + int tphy2_p2_to_p0 = get_tphy2_p2_to_p0(intel_dp); > + int establishment_period = get_establishment_period(intel_dp, > +crtc_state); > > return DIV_ROUND_UP(tphy2_p2_to_p0 + > get_lfps_cycle_time(crtc_state) + > - SILENCE_PERIOD_TIME + t1 + tcds, 1000); > + establishment_period, 1000); > } > > static int > @@ -128,7 +143,7 @@ _lnl_compute_aux_less_alpm_params(struct intel_dp > *intel_dp, > lfps_half_cycle; > > aux_less_wake_time = > - _lnl_compute_aux_less_wake_time(crtc_state); > + _lnl_compute_aux_less_wake_time(intel_dp, crtc_state); > aux_less_wake_lines = intel_usecs_to_scanlines(&crtc_state- > >hw.adjusted_mode, > aux_less_wake_time); > silence_period = get_silence_period_symbols(crtc_state); > -- > 2.29.0
