All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: boris.brezillon@bootlin.com (Boris Brezillon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: allow selecting a higher pixel-clock that requested
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 11:07:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180824110713.3c801034@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180824085501.9740-3-peda@axentia.se>

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:55:01 +0200
Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se> wrote:

> But only if the highest pixel-clock frequency lower than requested
> is significantly much less accurate that the lowest frequency higher
> than requested.
> 
> I pulled "10 times" as the discriminator out of the hat, and went with
> that.

Okay, let's go with that until we have a way to properly expose display
tolerance.

> 
> This is useful, if e.g. the target pixel-clock is 65MHz and the sys_clk
> is 132MHz. In this case the highest possible pixel-clock lower than the
> requested 65MHz is 52.8MHz, which is almost 20% off (and outside the
> spec for the panel). The lowest possible pixel-clock higher than 65MHz
> is 66MHz, which is a *much* better match, and only 1.5% off.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> index 71c9cd90d2ae..0c2717ed4ac6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> @@ -116,6 +116,19 @@ static void atmel_hlcdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb(struct drm_crtc *c)
>  		div = DIV_ROUND_UP(prate, mode_rate);
>  		if (ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div) & ~ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK)
>  			div = ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK;
> +	} else {
> +		int div_low = prate / mode_rate;
> +
> +		if (div_low >= 2 &&
> +		    ((prate / div_low - mode_rate) <
> +		     10 * (mode_rate - prate / div)))
> +			/*
> +			 * At least 10 times better when
> +			 * using a higher frequency than
> +			 * requested, instead of a lower.
> +			 * So, go with that.
> +			 */
> +			div = div_low;
>  	}
>  
>  	cfg |= ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div);

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: allow selecting a higher pixel-clock that requested
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 11:07:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180824110713.3c801034@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180824085501.9740-3-peda@axentia.se>

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:55:01 +0200
Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se> wrote:

> But only if the highest pixel-clock frequency lower than requested
> is significantly much less accurate that the lowest frequency higher
> than requested.
> 
> I pulled "10 times" as the discriminator out of the hat, and went with
> that.

Okay, let's go with that until we have a way to properly expose display
tolerance.

> 
> This is useful, if e.g. the target pixel-clock is 65MHz and the sys_clk
> is 132MHz. In this case the highest possible pixel-clock lower than the
> requested 65MHz is 52.8MHz, which is almost 20% off (and outside the
> spec for the panel). The lowest possible pixel-clock higher than 65MHz
> is 66MHz, which is a *much* better match, and only 1.5% off.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> index 71c9cd90d2ae..0c2717ed4ac6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> @@ -116,6 +116,19 @@ static void atmel_hlcdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb(struct drm_crtc *c)
>  		div = DIV_ROUND_UP(prate, mode_rate);
>  		if (ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div) & ~ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK)
>  			div = ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK;
> +	} else {
> +		int div_low = prate / mode_rate;
> +
> +		if (div_low >= 2 &&
> +		    ((prate / div_low - mode_rate) <
> +		     10 * (mode_rate - prate / div)))
> +			/*
> +			 * At least 10 times better when
> +			 * using a higher frequency than
> +			 * requested, instead of a lower.
> +			 * So, go with that.
> +			 */
> +			div = div_low;
>  	}
>  
>  	cfg |= ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div);

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: allow selecting a higher pixel-clock that requested
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 11:07:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180824110713.3c801034@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180824085501.9740-3-peda@axentia.se>

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:55:01 +0200
Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se> wrote:

> But only if the highest pixel-clock frequency lower than requested
> is significantly much less accurate that the lowest frequency higher
> than requested.
> 
> I pulled "10 times" as the discriminator out of the hat, and went with
> that.

Okay, let's go with that until we have a way to properly expose display
tolerance.

> 
> This is useful, if e.g. the target pixel-clock is 65MHz and the sys_clk
> is 132MHz. In this case the highest possible pixel-clock lower than the
> requested 65MHz is 52.8MHz, which is almost 20% off (and outside the
> spec for the panel). The lowest possible pixel-clock higher than 65MHz
> is 66MHz, which is a *much* better match, and only 1.5% off.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> index 71c9cd90d2ae..0c2717ed4ac6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/atmel-hlcdc/atmel_hlcdc_crtc.c
> @@ -116,6 +116,19 @@ static void atmel_hlcdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb(struct drm_crtc *c)
>  		div = DIV_ROUND_UP(prate, mode_rate);
>  		if (ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div) & ~ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK)
>  			div = ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV_MASK;
> +	} else {
> +		int div_low = prate / mode_rate;
> +
> +		if (div_low >= 2 &&
> +		    ((prate / div_low - mode_rate) <
> +		     10 * (mode_rate - prate / div)))
> +			/*
> +			 * At least 10 times better when
> +			 * using a higher frequency than
> +			 * requested, instead of a lower.
> +			 * So, go with that.
> +			 */
> +			div = div_low;
>  	}
>  
>  	cfg |= ATMEL_HLCDC_CLKDIV(div);


  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-24  9:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-24  8:54 [PATCH 0/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: revise selection of pixel-clock frequency divider Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  8:54 ` Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  8:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: prefer a higher rate clock as pixel-clock base Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  8:55   ` Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  8:59   ` Boris Brezillon
2018-08-24  8:59     ` Boris Brezillon
2018-08-24  8:59     ` Boris Brezillon
2018-08-24  8:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/atmel-hlcdc: allow selecting a higher pixel-clock that requested Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  8:55   ` Peter Rosin
2018-08-24  9:07   ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2018-08-24  9:07     ` Boris Brezillon
2018-08-24  9:07     ` Boris Brezillon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180824110713.3c801034@bbrezillon \
    --to=boris.brezillon@bootlin.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.