On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:42:24PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >> GK20A's timer is directly attached to the system timer and cannot be >> calibrated. Skip the calibration phase on that chip since the >> corresponding registers do not exist. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c | 19 +++++++++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >> index c0bdd10358d7..822fe0d8a871 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >> @@ -185,6 +185,10 @@ nv04_timer_init(struct nouveau_object *object) >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> + /* gk20a does not have the calibration registers */ >> + if (device->chipset == 0xea) >> + goto skip_clk_init; > > I'm concerned that this won't scale in the future. Perhaps a better > solution would be to add a "flags" or "features" field to struct > nouveau_device along with feature bits such as HAS_CALIBRATION or > similar. > > That way we don't have to touch this code for every new future Tegra > chip. Unless perhaps if there's a reason to expect things to change in > newer generations. I've already handled this in a slightly different way in the tree I'd previously pointed Alex at (I think!), as I needed to do the same for GM107. Should just be able to use that implementation (so, just change the probe patch) here too. Thanks, Ben. > > Thierry > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
