On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:53:58AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 02:29:29PM +0000, David Weinehall wrote:
> > GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ is deprecated for >= gen10;
> > don't try to program it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Weinehall <david.weineh...@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 11 +++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > index 07118c0b69d3..9f0ca3ae28f8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> > @@ -6568,11 +6568,14 @@ static void gen9_enable_rps(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv)
> > {
> > intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
> >
> > - /* Program defaults and thresholds for RPS*/
> > - I915_WRITE(GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ,
> > - GEN9_FREQUENCY(dev_priv->gt_pm.rps.rp1_freq));
> > + /* Program defaults and thresholds for RPS */
> > +
> > + /* GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ is deprecated for >= gen10 */
> > + if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) == 9)
>
> I believe if we use INTEL_GEN < 10 we can avoid the comment.
>
> I noticed now that we have nowadays other cases with INTEL_GEN == <num>
> so I wonder if this is our new trend or if we should stop doing this
> and use our old IS_GEN<num> everywhere as possible... in this case IS_GEN9.
Right, IS_GEN9() would probably make more sense.
> I won't niptick on those... since the content itself of this patch
> is right according to the PM specs. So, one way or another fell free
> to use:
>
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@intel.com>
>
> > + I915_WRITE(GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ,
> > + GEN9_FREQUENCY(dev_priv->gt_pm.rps.rp1_freq));
> >
> > - /* 1 second timeout*/
> > + /* 1 second timeout */
> > I915_WRITE(GEN6_RP_DOWN_TIMEOUT,
> > GT_INTERVAL_FROM_US(dev_priv, 1000000));
> >
> > --
> > 2.15.0
> >
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
