On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 19:01 +0530, Chandrabhanu Mahapatra wrote: > DISPC_FCLK is incorrectly used as functional clock of DISPC in scaling > calculations. So, DISPC_CORE_CLK replaces as functional clock of DISPC. > DISPC_CORE_CLK is derived from DISPC_FCLK divided by an independent DISPC > divisor LCD. > > Signed-off-by: Chandrabhanu Mahapatra <cmahapatra@xxxxxx> > --- > drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------ > drivers/video/omap2/dss/dss.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c > index 17ffa71..0417423 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c > +++ b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c > @@ -1855,7 +1855,7 @@ static int dispc_ovl_calc_scaling(enum omap_plane plane, > fclk = calc_fclk(channel, in_width, in_height, > out_width, out_height); > error = (in_width > maxsinglelinewidth || !fclk || > - fclk > dispc_fclk_rate()); > + fclk > dispc_core_clk_rate()); The patch is now otherwise fine, but I think it needs some more renaming. Now the code mixes fclk and core-clk names, which is rather confusing. I guess the calc_fclk should actually be calc_req_core_clk? And the fclk variable core_clk (or cclk or something)? Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
