From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> The coment in intel_vrr_extra_vblank_delay() is a bit outdated now that we generally got rid of the "vblank delay" stuff. Update the comment to better describe the current state of things.
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vrr.c | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vrr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vrr.c index 8875e5fe86aa..c28491b9002a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vrr.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vrr.c @@ -87,10 +87,8 @@ static int intel_vrr_extra_vblank_delay(struct intel_display *display) /* * On ICL/TGL VRR hardware inserts one extra scanline * just after vactive, which pushes the vmin decision - * boundary ahead accordingly. We'll include the extra - * scanline in our vblank delay estimates to make sure - * that we never underestimate how long we have until - * the delayed vblank has passed. + * boundary ahead accordingly, and thus reduces the + * max guardband length by one scanline. */ return DISPLAY_VER(display) < 13 ? 1 : 0; } -- 2.49.1
