I confess I never fully understood that previous calculation,
so this is not a "fix". But let's simplify this math
so poor brains like mine can read and make some sense of
it in the future.
v2: Don't follow the spec since that gives invalid
values and it is also confusing. This Ville's
version is much simpler.
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: James Ausmus <james.ausmus@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c
index 361b7102b602..f9651accecc9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c
@@ -2153,6 +2153,8 @@ static void cnl_wrpll_params_populate(struct skl_wrpll_params *params,
u32 dco_freq, u32 ref_freq,
int pdiv, int qdiv, int kdiv)
{
+ u64 dco;
+
switch (kdiv) {
case 1:
params->kdiv = 1;
@@ -2189,9 +2191,10 @@ static void cnl_wrpll_params_populate(struct skl_wrpll_params *params,
params->qdiv_ratio = qdiv;
params->qdiv_mode = (qdiv == 1) ? 0 : 1;
- params->dco_integer = div_u64(dco_freq, ref_freq);
- params->dco_fraction = div_u64((div_u64((uint64_t)dco_freq<<15, (uint64_t)ref_freq) -
- ((uint64_t)params->dco_integer<<15)) * 0x8000, 0x8000);
+ dco = dco_freq;
+ dco = div_u64(dco << 15, ref_freq);
+ params->dco_integer = dco >> 15;
+ params->dco_fraction = dco & 0x7fff;
}
static bool
--
2.13.6
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
