On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 01:28:03PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov 2025, Imre Deak <[email protected]> wrote: > > USe intel_port_to_tc() in mtl_port_to_pll_id(), instead of open coding > > the same. > > Patch 1 just open coded it. Why have this back and forth instead of > starting off with patch 2 that directly fixes the issue? It's not like > we need to backport any of this anywhere.
I still wanted to keep the fix itself simple, as it has been tested already by CI without the rest of the changes, to make both reviewing and merging it simpler. > BR, > Jani. > > > > > Cc: Suraj Kandpal <[email protected]> > > Cc: Mika Kahola <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > index 8ae8cc7ad79d3..e0e5e5f65d193 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ enum intel_dpll_id icl_tc_port_to_pll_id(enum tc_port > > tc_port) > > enum intel_dpll_id mtl_port_to_pll_id(struct intel_display *display, enum > > port port) > > { > > if (port >= PORT_TC1) > > - return icl_tc_port_to_pll_id(port - PORT_TC1 + TC_PORT_1); > > + return icl_tc_port_to_pll_id(intel_port_to_tc(display, port)); > > > > switch (port) { > > case PORT_A: > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel
