On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 05:35:55AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > It was identified that in some cases when moving cursor Hardware can do > mistake with idle_frame count. So Spec is being updated to use > 2 as minimum idle_frames. > > Reference: https://hsdhsw.intel.com/hsd/haswell_platform/default.aspx#sighting/default.aspx?sighting_id=4394433 > Cc: Arthur Runyan <arthur.j.runyan@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> Since we have full-blown sw frontbuffer tracking: Do we care? I.e. is the effect of idle_frames = 1 that the hw will go bananas (bad, we want this patch) or that it might miss a cursor movement (no problem, the kernel will catch it anyway)? Cheers, Daniel > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > index 47e9d71..8cfbbc2 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > @@ -2178,7 +2178,7 @@ static void intel_edp_psr_enable_source(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) > struct drm_device *dev = dig_port->base.base.dev; > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; > uint32_t max_sleep_time = 0x1f; > - uint32_t idle_frames = 1; > + uint32_t idle_frames = 2; /* 2 is the minimum allowed */ > uint32_t val = 0x0; > const uint32_t link_entry_time = EDP_PSR_MIN_LINK_ENTRY_TIME_8_LINES; > bool only_standby = false; > -- > 1.9.3 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
