Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
(psr1 control register)is set to 0.
Also ,PSR2_IDLE state is looked up from SRD_STATUS(psr1 register)
instead of
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi
On Thu, 2017-01-12 at 23:30 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
(psr1 control register)is set to 0.
Also ,PSR2_IDLE state is looked up from SRD_STATUS(psr1 register)
instead of
On Monday 09 January 2017 10:47 PM, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 18:26 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
>> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
>> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
>> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31
Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
(psr1 control register)is set to 0.
Also ,PSR2_IDLE state is looked up from SRD_STATUS(psr1 register)
instead of
On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 18:26 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
> (psr1 control register)is set to 0.
> Also
017 2:12 AM
To: Nagaraju, Vathsala
Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org;
jim.bride at linux.intel.com; Patil, Deepti
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] drm/i915/psr: fix blank screen issue for psr2
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:55 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and
Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
(psr1 control register)is set to 0.
Also ,PSR2_IDLE state is looked up from SRD_STATUS(psr1 register)
instead of
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:55 +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
> (psr1 control register)is set to 0.
> Also
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 12:55:59AM +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
> (psr1 control register)is set to 0.
> Also
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 05:00:56PM +0530, vathsala nagaraju wrote:
> Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
> psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
> PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
> (psr1 control register)is set to 0.
> Also
Psr1 and psr2 are mutually exclusive,ie when psr2 is enabled,
psr1 should be disabled.When psr2 is exited , bit 31 of reg
PSR2_CTL must be set to 0 but currently bit 31 of SRD_CTL
(psr1 control register)is set to 0.
Also ,PSR2_IDLE state is looked up from SRD_STATUS(psr1 register)
instead of
12 matches
Mail list logo