On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 08:24:21AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > The speculation is that we can conserve more power by masking off the > interrupts at source (PMINTRMSK) rather than filtering them by the > up/down thresholds (RPINTLIM). > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > Cc: Deepak S <deepa...@intel.com> > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > index 3ad590924062..0a76e9baeca2 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > @@ -3006,6 +3006,25 @@ static void gen6_set_rps_thresholds(struct > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u8 val) > dev_priv->rps.last_adj = 0; > } > > +static u32 gen6_rps_pm_mask(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u8 val) > +{ > + u32 mask; > + > + mask = GEN6_PM_RP_DOWN_TIMEOUT; > + if (val > dev_priv->rps.min_freq_softlimit) > + mask |= GEN6_PM_RP_DOWN_THRESHOLD;
Actually we only need DOWN_TIMEOUT when above min freq as well. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx