Comment # 24
on bug 77009
from Christian König
(In reply to comment #22) > I am trying to understand the plls. Well how deep are you interested in getting into this? PLLs can be complicated, but are also one of the very basic building blocks of electronics. > I read the org. bug report 76564. I > assumed increasing the max would allow higher pll vals. But it does go down > with some. Does that make sense? More or less yes. See your numbers for example, without the limit patch you had the params like this: 148340 - 14834, pll dividers - fb: 741.7 ref: 50, post 10 This means with a feedback divider of 741.7, a referenz divider of 50 and a post divider of 10 you have an exact match for the frequency. There is just the little problem that as the divider numbers get higher the signal gets more unstable. So in reality you don't get 148.340 MHz, but instead something that fluctuates between 148.339 MHz and 148.341 MHz (for example). The overall match for the average frequency is still better than with lower numbers, but your TV/Monitor can't deal with such high fluctuations in it. > Your patch does wonders for this A4-3400. I am trying to understand it > better. > > Here your max is 100. ref: 10, post 10 >>>> 10 * 10 = 100 max. Yes correct.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
