On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 04:21:27PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:18:57PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 04:09:42PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote: > > > On ma, 2015-07-06 at 14:44 +0300, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Since > > > > commit e62925567c7926e78bc8ca976cde5c28ea265a49 > > > > Author: Vandana Kannan <vandana.kannan@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Date: Wed Jul 1 17:02:57 2015 +0530 > > > > > > > > drm/i915/bxt: BUNs related to port PLL > > > > > > > > BXT DPLL can now generate frequencies in the 216-223 MHz range. > > > > Adjust the HDMI port clock checks to account for the reduced range > > > > of invalid frequencies. > > > > > > > > Cc: Vandana Kannan <vandana.kannan@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Ville wrote a tool for CHV that calculates the valid frequencies based > > > on the algorithm in the kernel. With the help of that I verified that > > > this matches the list of target frequencies bxt_find_best_dpll() will > > > accept, so: > > > > Could we have that tool in i-g-t? > > We could lift all the .find_dpll routines from the kernel into i-g-t. > The only real concern is that we'll forget to update the i-g-t copies > when changing the kernel. But I guess it would still be easier to just > update them slightly when noticing that rather than having to lift them > from the kernel all over again. Right, while not ideal, I think having something in i-g-t, even if it diverges slightly (but then we can remind the patch author to update the i-g-t tool during review) is still better than not having that code around at all. -- Damien _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
