On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 11:26:11AM +0530, deepa...@linux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Deepak S <deepa...@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Workaround fixed in Latest VLV revision. Forcing Gfx clk up not needed, and
>> Requesting the
>> min freq should bring bring the voltage Vnn.
>>
>> v2: Drop WA for Latest VLV revision (Ville)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Deepak S <deepa...@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> index a90fdbd..6b6cfd4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
>> @@ -3212,6 +3212,14 @@ void gen6_set_rps(struct drm_device *dev, u8 val)
>> */
>> static void vlv_set_rps_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>> {
>> + struct drm_device *dev = dev_priv->dev;
>> +
>> + /* Latest VLV doesn't need Vnn WA*/
>
> Maybe this should say "Latest VLV doesn't need to force the gfx clock"
> or something like that. We are still doing this to reduce Vnn after all.
>
> Apart from that this matches my observations so:
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
Pushed to -fixes with the comment changed and commit message massaged a
bit. Thanks for the patch and review.
BR,
Jani.
>
>> + if (dev->pdev->revision >= 0xd) {
>> + valleyview_set_rps(dev_priv->dev,
>> dev_priv->rps.min_freq_softlimit);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> /*
>> * When we are idle. Drop to min voltage state.
>> */
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
