> Subject: [PATCH v2 21/32] drm/i915/cx0: Add MTL+ .update_active_dpll hook > > Add .update_active_dpll function pointer to support dpll framework. Reuse ICL > function pointer. > > v2: Add check for !HAS_LT_PHY (Suraj)
I did not comment asking for this change also brings some questions in my mind here > > Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Suraj Kandpal <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c | 3 +++ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c | 1 + > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > index 002ccd47856d..6b43d326e50c 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > @@ -3671,6 +3671,9 @@ void intel_ddi_update_active_dpll(struct > intel_atomic_state *state, > if (DISPLAY_VER(display) >= 14 || !intel_encoder_is_tc(encoder)) So this check here will never let you call dpll_mgr->update_active_dpll hook So do you not what to remove it. If the answer is you want to keep this check then you do not need (!HAS_LT_PHY) If the answer is you need to get this removed only then does it make sense to have this check And the check should be return if (HAS_LT_PHY()) Regards, Suraj Kandpal > return; > > + if (!HAS_LT_PHY(display)) > + return; > + > for_each_intel_crtc_in_pipe_mask(display->drm, pipe_crtc, > > intel_crtc_joined_pipe_mask(crtc_state)) > intel_dpll_update_active(state, pipe_crtc, encoder); diff --git > a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > index c45f18201ee8..e6dd6f1123d6 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > @@ -4449,6 +4449,7 @@ static const struct intel_dpll_mgr mtl_pll_mgr = { > .compute_dplls = mtl_compute_dplls, > .get_dplls = mtl_get_dplls, > .put_dplls = icl_put_dplls, > + .update_active_dpll = icl_update_active_dpll, > }; > > /** > -- > 2.34.1
