On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:24:03AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
From: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>
Enable LPSP for Display13 and get the proper power well
enable check in place. For Display13 it is PW2 which
need to check for LPSP.
Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c
index d62b18d5ecd8..2af7d74d5960 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c
@@ -1316,6 +1316,13 @@ static int i915_lpsp_status(struct seq_file *m, void *unused)
switch (INTEL_GEN(i915)) {
case 12:
+ if (HAS_DISPLAY13(i915)) {
does it still make sense to check for gen && HAS_DISPLAY13? Shouldn't we
be checking only by HAS_DISPLAY13(i915) here, outside the switch()?
Lucas De Marchi
+ LPSP_STATUS(!intel_lpsp_power_well_enabled(i915,
+ SKL_DISP_PW_2));
+ break;
+ }
+
+ fallthrough;
case 11:
LPSP_STATUS(!intel_lpsp_power_well_enabled(i915, ICL_DISP_PW_3));
break;
--
2.25.4
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
