oh! ugly! I forgot commit subject. Please ignore these 2 patches On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > v2: Use VBT + 1 as suggested by Arthur. So this patch depends on > PSR VBT block parsing. > > Reference: hsdhsw/4394433 > Cc: Arthur Runyan <arthur.j.runyan@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > index ceb528f..9f2000b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > @@ -2174,7 +2174,12 @@ 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; > + /* Lately it was identified that depending on panel idle frame count > + * calculated at HW can be off by 1. So let's use what came > + * from VBT + 1 and at minimum 2 to be on the safe side. > + */ > + uint32_t idle_frames = dev_priv->vbt.psr.idle_frames ? > + dev_priv->vbt.psr.idle_frames + 1 : 2; > 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 -- Rodrigo Vivi Blog: http://blog.vivi.eng.br _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
