On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:06:47PM +0100, Kahola, Mika wrote:
> > > static void broxton_modeset_global_resources(struct drm_atomic_state
> > *old_state)
> > > broxton_set_cdclk(dev, req_cdclk);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/* compute the max rate for new configuration */ static int
> > > +ilk_max_pixel_rate(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) {
> > > + struct drm_device *dev = dev_priv->dev;
> > > + struct intel_crtc *crtc;
> > > + int max_pixel_rate = 0;
> > > +
> > > + for_each_intel_crtc(dev, crtc) {
> > > + if (crtc->new_enabled)
> > > + max_pixel_rate = max((int)max_pixel_rate,
> > > + (int)ilk_pipe_pixel_rate(crtc-
> > >config));
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return max_pixel_rate;
> > > +}
> >
> > new_enabled doesn't look like what we want to look at, it looks like a
> > temporary field we shouldn't be using in new code. Maybe
> > crtc->state->enable instead?
>
> You're right! This was a good catch. I was a bit confused which one to
> use here. I'll revise the patch
I've noticed that the BDW patch after that has to be rebased on top of
this change as well.
--
Damien
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
