From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests/pm_rps: Round requested freq
 correctly
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 16:52:30 +0200
Message-ID: <20140207145230.GX3891@intel.com>
References: <1391763814-6644-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<20140207093330.GH5360@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
	<CAKMK7uHp1aUKFLibmRoMAL+PvXRmmFfwXF2fAQiwQxRescVEgw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140207144414.GF19424@jeffdesk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19708FBB19
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri,  7 Feb 2014 06:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140207144414.GF19424@jeffdesk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 08:44:14AM -0600, Jeff McGee wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 11:15:15AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk=
> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:03:33AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > >> The kernel will round it, so if we don't we'll have a spurious
> > >> mismatch. Happens on my machine here with 650-1300MHz range, where t=
he
> > >> midpoint is 975.
> > >>
> > >> Cc: Jeff McGee <jeff.mcgee@intel.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > >> ---
> > >>  tests/pm_rps.c | 3 +++
> > >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/tests/pm_rps.c b/tests/pm_rps.c
> > >> index 467038104ec6..27e758755e3f 100644
> > >> --- a/tests/pm_rps.c
> > >> +++ b/tests/pm_rps.c
> > >> @@ -350,6 +350,9 @@ static void min_max_config(void (*check)(void))
> > >>  {
> > >>       int fmid =3D (origfreqs[RPn] + origfreqs[RP0]) / 2;
> > >>
> > >> +     /* hw (and so kernel) currently rounds to 50 MHz ... */
> > >
> > > s/rounds/truncates/ or if it really does round, you need to adjust the
> > > calculation.
> > =

> > We just need to use something divisible by 50 so that the value we
> > write and the one we get match up. Whether it's truncating or rounding
> > doesn't matter really.
> > -Daniel
> =

> Darn, I considered this possibility but forgot to account for it in the t=
est.
> I think what I was going to do was to create another writeval variant
> which doesn't do read back matching check. This was because I didn't want=
 to
> assume that all systems use a 50 Mhz frequency increment (do they all?).

VLV sure doesn't.

-- =

Ville Syrj=E4l=E4
Intel OTC