Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/amdgpu/display: handle multiple numbers of fclks in dcn_calcs.c

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2020-01-28 2:47 p.m., Alex Deucher wrote:
We might get different numbers of clocks from powerplay depending
on what the OEM has populated.

Bug: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/issues/963
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
---
  .../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c  | 31 ++++++++++++-------
  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c
index a27d84ca15a5..8ad32a11d363 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c
@@ -1446,17 +1446,26 @@ void dcn_bw_update_from_pplib(struct dc *dc)
  		res = verify_clock_values(&fclks);
if (res) {
-		ASSERT(fclks.num_levels >= 3);
-		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmin0p65 = 32 * (fclks.data[0].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0) / 1000.0;
-		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmid0p72 = dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
-				(fclks.data[fclks.num_levels - (fclks.num_levels > 2 ? 3 : 2)].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
-				* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
-		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vnom0p8 = dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
-				(fclks.data[fclks.num_levels - 2].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
-				* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
-		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmax0p9 = dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
-				(fclks.data[fclks.num_levels - 1].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
-				* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
+		unsigned vmin0p65_idx = 0;
+		unsigned vmid0p72_idx = fclks.num_levels -
+			(fclks.num_levels > 2 ? 3 : (fclks.num_levels > 1 ? 2 : 1));
+		unsigned vnom0p8_idx = fclks.num_levels - (fclks.num_levels > 1 ? 2 : 1);
+		unsigned vmax0p9_idx = fclks.num_levels - 1;

Might want an assertion for fclks.num_levels > 0 still, since that's what the function is expecting now.

With that change, this is:

Reviewed-by: Nicholas Kazlauskas <nicholas.kazlauskas@xxxxxxx>

+
+		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmin0p65 =
+			32 * (fclks.data[vmin0p65_idx].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0) / 1000.0;
+		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmid0p72 =
+			dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
+			(fclks.data[vmid0p72_idx].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
+			* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
+		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vnom0p8 =
+			dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
+			(fclks.data[vnom0p8_idx].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
+			* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
+		dc->dcn_soc->fabric_and_dram_bandwidth_vmax0p9 =
+			dc->dcn_soc->number_of_channels *
+			(fclks.data[vmax0p9_idx].clocks_in_khz / 1000.0)
+			* ddr4_dram_factor_single_Channel / 1000.0;
  	} else
  		BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER();

_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux