On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 04/11/2014 04:31 PM, Ben Skeggs wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@xxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Thierry Reding >>>>> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 05:42:24PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> GK20A's timer is directly attached to the system timer and cannot be >>>>>>> calibrated. Skip the calibration phase on that chip since the >>>>>>> corresponding registers do not exist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c | 19 >>>>>>> +++++++++++++------ >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >>>>>>> index c0bdd10358d7..822fe0d8a871 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/timer/nv04.c >>>>>>> @@ -185,6 +185,10 @@ nv04_timer_init(struct nouveau_object *object) >>>>>>> if (ret) >>>>>>> return ret; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> + /* gk20a does not have the calibration registers */ >>>>>>> + if (device->chipset == 0xea) >>>>>>> + goto skip_clk_init; >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm concerned that this won't scale in the future. Perhaps a better >>>>>> solution would be to add a "flags" or "features" field to struct >>>>>> nouveau_device along with feature bits such as HAS_CALIBRATION or >>>>>> similar. >>>>>> >>>>>> That way we don't have to touch this code for every new future Tegra >>>>>> chip. Unless perhaps if there's a reason to expect things to change in >>>>>> newer generations. >>>>> >>>>> I've already handled this in a slightly different way in the tree I'd >>>>> previously pointed Alex at (I think!), as I needed to do the same for >>>>> GM107. >>>>> >>>>> Should just be able to use that implementation (so, just change the >>>>> probe patch) here too. >>>> >>>> >>>> I will skip this patch and use your implementation then. Btw, >>>> shouldn't the source file for the GK20A implementation be named nvea.c >>>> instead of gk20a.c? >>> >>> For the Maxwell stuff I've been using "gm107" now too. Since we're >>> working with you guys these days it seems better to use the same names >>> for things ;) >> >> >> So would you like us to use the same naming scheme as well? So far all my >> patches use "nvea.c" whenever I need to add code. > If it's not too much of a problem at this point, then that'd be good. > Right before I send -next for the next merge window I'll likely do a > mass rename anyway, so if we can get your patches merged before then > (which would be really good!), it doesn't matter much. No problem, I will update the naming to follow what you did with the timer driver and gm107. Hopefully I will soon manage to carve out some time to rebase these patches and send v2. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
