Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:40:35PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:57:43AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > > Op 28-10-16 om 18:59 schreef ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > > > When we end up not recomputing

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 10:07:51AM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 09:57 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > > Otherwise looks sane, I have a similar patch in my tree. I didn't > > submit it yet but the fix was similar. Except for the > > dev_cdclk stuff. > > > > With the last

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:57:43AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 28-10-16 om 18:59 schreef ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > When we end up not recomputing the cdclk, we need to populate > > intel_state->cdclk with the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 09:57 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Otherwise looks sane, I have a similar patch in my tree. I didn't > submit it yet but the fix was similar. Except for the > dev_cdclk stuff. > > With the last dev_cdclk assignment removed: > > Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

Op 28-10-16 om 18:59 schreef ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com: > From: Ville Syrjälä > > When we end up not recomputing the cdclk, we need to populate > intel_state->cdclk with the "atomic_cdclk_freq" instead of the > current cdclk_freq. When no pipes are active, the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:38:14PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Sat, 2016-10-29 at 00:30 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > I think it was probably due to > > > > commit 44d1240d006c9cd0249263b5449c8e4752500f6a > > Author: Marek Szyprowski > > Date:   Mon Jun 13 11:11:26

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Sat, 2016-10-29 at 00:30 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > I think it was probably due to > > commit 44d1240d006c9cd0249263b5449c8e4752500f6a > Author: Marek Szyprowski > Date:   Mon Jun 13 11:11:26 2016 +0200 > > drm: add generic zpos property > > If you want want

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:05:48PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 19:59 +0300, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > > Fixes: 1a617b77658e ("drm/i915: Keep track of the cdclk as if all crtc's > > were active.") > > Obviously, I'm pretty happy with this patch. One question

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 19:59 +0300, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > Fixes: 1a617b77658e ("drm/i915: Keep track of the cdclk as if all crtc's were > active.") Obviously, I'm pretty happy with this patch. One question though: this fixes a commit that shipped in v4.6. Do you have any idea why

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix cdclk vs. dev_cdclk mess when not recomputing things

From: Ville Syrjälä When we end up not recomputing the cdclk, we need to populate intel_state->cdclk with the "atomic_cdclk_freq" instead of the current cdclk_freq. When no pipes are active, the actual cdclk_freq may be lower than what the configuration of the