On Fri, 2021-02-12 at 21:20 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 10:21:59AM -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > The cfgcr0/1_clk_off mapping is wrong for adl-s what could cause
> > the wrong clock being disabled and leaving a not needed clock
> > running consuming more power than needed.
> >
> > Bspec: 50287
> > Bspec: 53812
> > Bspec: 53723
> > Fixes: d6d2bc996e45 ("drm/i915/adl_s: Configure Port clock registers for ADL-S")
> > Cc: Aditya Swarup <aditya.swarup@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c | 4 +++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 12 ++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> > index 2d6906f6995f..7631e080349d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c
> > @@ -1585,7 +1585,9 @@ hsw_set_signal_levels(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> > static u32 icl_dpclka_cfgcr0_clk_off(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > enum phy phy)
> > {
> > - if (IS_ROCKETLAKE(dev_priv)) {
> > + if (IS_ALDERLAKE_S(dev_priv)) {
> > + return ADLS_DPCLKA_CFGCR_DDI_CLK_OFF(phy);
> > + } else if (IS_ROCKETLAKE(dev_priv)) {
> > return RKL_DPCLKA_CFGCR0_DDI_CLK_OFF(phy);
> > } else if (intel_phy_is_combo(dev_priv, phy)) {
> > return ICL_DPCLKA_CFGCR0_DDI_CLK_OFF(phy);
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > index 224ad897af34..7c69b50ccc5c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> > @@ -10416,6 +10416,18 @@ enum skl_power_gate {
> > ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIJ_SEL_MASK, \
> > ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIK_SEL_MASK)
> >
> >
> > +#define _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIA_CLK_OFF REG_BIT(10)
> > +#define _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIB_CLK_OFF REG_BIT(11)
> > +#define _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDII_CLK_OFF REG_BIT(24)
> > +#define _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIJ_CLK_OFF REG_BIT(4)
> > +#define _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIK_CLK_OFF REG_BIT(5)
>
> So shose are apparently split between the two registers. Why aren't
> we defining these so that it would be obvious which register they
> live in? This stuff is confusing enough with the hw folks churning
> the bits around randomly on every platform, so I don't think we
> should add to the confusion by obfuscating the bit defines. I do
> like that you named the bits, which isn't case for the other
> platforms. Would be nice to fix it all up actually.
>
> Hmm. However, this new defintion seem to match
> ICL_DPCLKA_CFGCR0_DDI_CLK_OFF() 100%. So how can this be fixing
> something? Also ICL for sure can't have that many combo PHYs can
> it? We should nuke the extra stuff from the ICL defintion if it's
> no longer used.
Good catch & my bad.
Was fixing it for other platform and tought that it might be broken
for ADL-S too but as all ports are combo ports
ICL_DPCLKA_CFGCR0_DDI_CLK_OFF will do the right job.
Dropping this patch.
>
> > +#define ADLS_DPCLKA_CFGCR_DDI_CLK_OFF(phy) _PICK((phy), \
> > + _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIA_CLK_OFF, \
> > + _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIB_CLK_OFF, \
> > + _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDII_CLK_OFF, \
> > + _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIJ_CLK_OFF, \
> > + _ADLS_DPCLKA_DDIK_CLK_OFF)
> > +
> > /* CNL PLL */
> > #define DPLL0_ENABLE 0x46010
> > #define DPLL1_ENABLE 0x46014
> > --
> > 2.30.1
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
