On Thu, 15 May 2014, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 01:13:21PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 May 2014, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
>> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
>> > +static void snb_wm_latency_quirk(struct drm_device *dev)
>> > +{
>> > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>> > + bool changed;
>> > +
>> > + /*
>> > + * The BIOS provided WM memory latency values are often
>> > + * inadequate for high resolution displays. Adjust them.
>> > + */
>> > + changed = ilk_increase_wm_latency(dev_priv, dev_priv->wm.pri_latency,
>> > 12) |
>> > + ilk_increase_wm_latency(dev_priv, dev_priv->wm.spr_latency, 12)
>> > |
>> > + ilk_increase_wm_latency(dev_priv, dev_priv->wm.cur_latency, 12);
>>
>> Nitpick, s/|/||/g for bools.
>
> Consider side effects.
Ugh I'm slow today. Some might claim business as usual. I'll hide
somewhere.
Before I head under the rock, may I say bitops on bools are still ugly?
BR,
Jani.
> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
