On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 00:54 +0200, Martin Peres wrote: > Le 18/04/2011 00:32, Ben Skeggs a écrit : > > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 17:10 +0200, Martin Peres wrote: > >> --- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_perf.c | 6 +++--- > >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_perf.c > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_perf.c > >> index 950caba..d64a98a 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_perf.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_perf.c > >> @@ -177,9 +177,9 @@ nouveau_perf_init(struct drm_device *dev) > >> #define subent(n) entry[perf[2] + ((n) * perf[3])] > >> perflvl->fanspeed = 0; /*XXX*/ > >> perflvl->voltage = entry[2]; > >> - perflvl->core = (ROM16(subent(0))& 0xfff) * 1000; > >> - perflvl->shader = (ROM16(subent(1))& 0xfff) * 1000; > >> - perflvl->memory = (ROM16(subent(2))& 0xfff) * 1000; > >> + perflvl->core = (ROM16(subent(3))& 0xfff) * 1000; > >> + perflvl->shader = (ROM16(subent(3))& 0xfff) / 2 * 1000; > >> + perflvl->memory = (ROM16(subent(5))& 0xfff) * 1000; > > Um, NACK. This is *definitely* very very wrong on NVA8, which uses > > version 0x40 of this table too. > > > > Ben. > Crap, I would have sworn this table was introduced for Fermi! Sorry for > the noise then, I'll try to find a fix for that (other than looking at > the codename). I'm highly skeptical that it's correct on fermi too, but, I can't check that myself right now. I shall do it during the week however.
Ben. _______________________________________________ Nouveau mailing list Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
