On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:21:00PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 26 Aug 2014, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:00:55AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Move the vlv_power_sequencer_pipe() after the IS_VALLEYVIEW() check > >> > and flatten the rest of the function. > >> > >> Please imagine adding another platform there, and realize this just adds > >> unnecessary churn. > > > > I'd just add another reboot notifier then. > > Fair enough; it should be vlv_edp_notify_handler then. (No, don't send a > patch to change that! ;) > > > Frankly I don't understand the current one either. Why does it need to > > set the delay to max for instance? And does this mean that the > > PANEL_POWER_RESET bit doesn't actually work as advertised in the docs? > > *shrug* experimental evidence? > > commit 01527b3127997ef6370d5ad4fa25d96847fbf12a > Author: Clint Taylor <clinton.a.taylor@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Jul 7 13:01:46 2014 -0700 > > drm/i915/vlv: T12 eDP panel timing enforcement during reboot > > The panel power sequencer on vlv doesn't appear to accept changes to its > T12 power down duration during warm reboots. This change forces a delay > for warm reboots to the T12 panel timing as defined in the VBT table for > the connected panel. That explanation doesn't really make it any more clear to me. But if the reboot notifier helps someone somehow I can live with it. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
