These new cdclk values should be accounted for in the voltage level
selection (we can use the same voltage level as 307.2 and 312 rather
than bumping up up to the next higher level).
Bspec: 21809
Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
---
The EHL and TGL parts of the bspec haven't actually updated their
voltage requirement tables to mention the new cdclk frequencies at all,
so I'm assuming here that those platforms will follow ICL's lead of
using the same voltage level as the 307/312 clocks. I've filed a ticket
with the hardware team to confirm this; we should hold off on actually
merging these changes until we get a response.
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
index d3e56628af70..1329d3e60e26 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
@@ -1833,7 +1833,7 @@ static int icl_calc_cdclk_pll_vco(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int cdclk)
static u8 icl_calc_voltage_level(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int cdclk)
{
if (IS_ELKHARTLAKE(dev_priv)) {
- if (cdclk > 312000)
+ if (cdclk > 326400)
return 2;
else if (cdclk > 180000)
return 1;
@@ -1842,7 +1842,7 @@ static u8 icl_calc_voltage_level(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int cdclk)
} else {
if (cdclk > 556800)
return 2;
- else if (cdclk > 312000)
+ else if (cdclk > 326400)
return 1;
else
return 0;
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
