Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7 resend] drm/i915: Add the support of eDP on DP-D for Ibex/CPT

2010-06-16 Thread Zhenyu Wang 
On 2010.06.14 18:19:46 -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
 On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:32:21 +0800, Zhenyu Wang zhen...@linux.intel.com 
 wrote:
  From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
  
  This one adds support for eDP that connected on PCH DP-D port
  instead of CPU DP-A port, and only DP-D port could be used for eDP.
  
  https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27220
 
 Instead of changing a ton of EDP checks to be EDP || PCH_EDP, why aren't
 you just setting the output type to edp when you detect that DPD is EDP?

There's obviously difference between eDP from CPU and eDP from PCH, e.g no FDI
link setup for CPU eDP, so not fit in same output type. Or do you think a new
output type might be better for it?

-- 
Open Source Technology Center, Intel ltd.

$gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4D781827


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7 resend] drm/i915: Add the support of eDP on DP-D for Ibex/CPT

2010-06-12 Thread Chris Wilson 
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:32:21 +0800, Zhenyu Wang zhen...@linux.intel.com wrote:
 From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
 
 This one adds support for eDP that connected on PCH DP-D port
 instead of CPU DP-A port, and only DP-D port could be used for eDP.
 
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27220
 
 Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
 Tested-by: Jan-Hendrik Zab j...@jhz.name
 Tested-by: Templar temp...@rshc.de
 Signed-off-by: Zhenyu Wang zhen...@linux.intel.com
 ---
[snip]
  static void
 -intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bytes_per_pixel,
 +intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bpp,
int nlanes,
int pixel_clock,
int link_clock,
struct intel_dp_m_n *m_n)
  {
   m_n-tu = 64;
 - m_n-gmch_m = pixel_clock * bytes_per_pixel;
 + m_n-gmch_m = (pixel_clock * bpp)  3;
   m_n-gmch_n = link_clock * nlanes;
   intel_reduce_ratio(m_n-gmch_m, m_n-gmch_n);
   m_n-link_m = pixel_clock;

This rounds the gmch_m down. Is this correct? And how close to overflow
is pixel_clock today?
-ickle

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7 resend] drm/i915: Add the support of eDP on DP-D for Ibex/CPT

2010-06-12 Thread ykzhao 
On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 16:28 +0800, Chris Wilson wrote:
 On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:32:21 +0800, Zhenyu Wang zhen...@linux.intel.com 
 wrote:
  From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
  
  This one adds support for eDP that connected on PCH DP-D port
  instead of CPU DP-A port, and only DP-D port could be used for eDP.
  
  https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27220
  
  Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
  Tested-by: Jan-Hendrik Zab j...@jhz.name
  Tested-by: Templar temp...@rshc.de
  Signed-off-by: Zhenyu Wang zhen...@linux.intel.com
  ---
 [snip]
   static void
  -intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bytes_per_pixel,
  +intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bpp,
   int nlanes,
   int pixel_clock,
   int link_clock,
   struct intel_dp_m_n *m_n)
   {
  m_n-tu = 64;
  -   m_n-gmch_m = pixel_clock * bytes_per_pixel;
  +   m_n-gmch_m = (pixel_clock * bpp)  3;
  m_n-gmch_n = link_clock * nlanes;
  intel_reduce_ratio(m_n-gmch_m, m_n-gmch_n);
  m_n-link_m = pixel_clock;
 
 This rounds the gmch_m down. Is this correct? And how close to overflow
 is pixel_clock today?

The bpp is the abbreviation of bits per pixel and this is not round
down. It is only to convert the bits per second to bytes per second,
which will be used to calculation the DP M/N .

 -ickle
 

___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx