On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 16:01:50 +0200 Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 09:49:55PM +0800, Lee, Chon Ming wrote: > > On 11/07 14:46, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:23:26PM +0800, Chon Ming Lee wrote: > > > > For DDR data rate reporting by Punit in PUNIT_GPU_FREQ_STS, the actual > > > > data encoding is 00b=800, 01b=1066, 10b=1333, 11b=1333. > > > > > > > > Some premium VLV sku will get the DDR_DATA_RATE set as 11. As a result, > > > > the turbo frequency reporting will be incorrect without this workaround. > > > > > > Does that mean that the original encoding we used was in fact correct, > > > and the new one is not? > > > > > > > The spec documents the encoding is 00b=800, 01b=1066, 10b=1333, 11b=invalid > > There was another encoding in some older spec. And we just changed from > that to the current one. > > > > > But after check with the punit owner, the 11b is refer to 1333 as well. It is > > not invalid anymore. > > OK. In that case: > > Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Yeah and just for the record books, the old encoding was listed as 00 = 800, 01=800, 10=1066, 11=1333. But apparently it's been shifted left, with 11 staying as 1333. So Chon Ming's patch looks ok. I don't understand 2/2 though; was there a Punit HAS or Punit turbo HAS update we missed? -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
