Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-24 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: Apparently massive overclocking like that makes your system die prematurely in a crash. So 3.10 it is, imo. -Daniel It's like all overclocking I guess, we simply give the user an opportunity to shoot themselves in the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-23 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:19:56PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke it: commit 42c0526c930523425ff6edc95b7235ce7ab9308d Author: Ben Widawsky

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-23 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 08:32:53PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:19:56PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke it:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-23 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 08:39:30PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 08:32:53PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:19:56PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-20 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:19:56PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke it: commit 42c0526c930523425ff6edc95b7235ce7ab9308d Author: Ben Widawsky

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-20 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:19:56 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke it: commit 42c0526c930523425ff6edc95b7235ce7ab9308d Author: Ben

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-20 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:21:47AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:19:56 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-20 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:33:28 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:21:47AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:19:56 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-20 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:57:53AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:33:28 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:21:47AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:19:56 -0700 Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: Change

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correct sandybrige overclocking

2013-03-19 Thread Ben Widawsky
Change the gen6+ max delay if the pcode read was successful (not the inverse). The previous code was all sorts of wrong and has existed since I broke it: commit 42c0526c930523425ff6edc95b7235ce7ab9308d Author: Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net Date: Wed Sep 26 10:34:00 2012 -0700 drm/i915: