On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 06:26:08PM -0800, tom.orourke@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Tom O'Rourke <Tom.O'Rourke@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> When frequency requests are made by SLPC, host driver
> should not attempt to make frequency requests due to
> potential conflicts.
>
> Host-based turbo operations are already avoided when
> SLPC is used. This change covers other frequency
> requests such as from sysfs or debugfs interfaces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom O'Rourke <Tom.O'Rourke@xxxxxxxxx>
Does this break the sysfs interface, i.e. can userspace still set limits
when SLPC is in use?
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index ec1868b..f5a6bf6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -4501,6 +4501,9 @@ void gen6_rps_boost(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>
> void intel_set_rps(struct drm_device *dev, u8 val)
> {
> + if (HAS_SLPC(dev))
> + return;
> +
> if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev))
> valleyview_set_rps(dev, val);
> else
> --
> 1.9.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
