If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
fallback to lower lane count.
This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
value after link training failure.
v5:
* Start the fallback at the lane count value passed not
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 07:39:50AM -0800, Manasi Navare wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:22:49PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Manasi Navare wrote:
> > > If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
> > > link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Manasi Navare wrote:
> If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
> link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
> fallback to lower lane count.
> This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
> value after link training failure.
>
> v4:
>
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:22:49PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Manasi Navare wrote:
> > If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
> > link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
> > fallback to lower lane count.
> > This function finds the next
If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
fallback to lower lane count.
This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
value after link training failure.
v4:
* Remove the redundant variable link_train_failed
v3:
*
If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
fallback to lower lane count.
This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
value after link training failure.
v3:
* Remove fallback_link_rate_index variable, just obtain
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, Manasi Navare wrote:
> If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
> link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
> fallback to lower lane count.
> This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
> value after link training failure.
>
> v2:
>
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 02:58:46PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, Manasi Navare wrote:
> > If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
> > link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
> > fallback to lower lane count.
> > This function finds the next
Jani/Ville , could you please review this patch?
Jani, you had mentioned it looks good and we were only waiting for
ACKs from DRM, so now from the DRM point of view all these patches
are ACKed and it looks good.
But I need r-b for these two i915 specific patches to get them merged.
Regards
If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
fallback to lower lane count.
This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
value after link training failure.
v2:
Squash the patch that returns the link rate index (Jani
If link training fails, then we need to fallback to lower
link rate first and if link training fails at RBR, then
fallback to lower lane count.
This function finds the next lower link rate/lane count
value after link training failure.
v2:
Squash the patch that returns the link rate index (Jani
11 matches
Mail list logo