From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [RFC 4/7] drm/i915: Program PPS registers Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:08:48 +0200 Message-ID: <20141020160848.GT26941@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <1413809409-8569-1-git-send-email-vandana.kannan@intel.com> <1413809409-8569-5-git-send-email-vandana.kannan@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC7C894FF for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 09:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id y10so5756544wgg.3 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 09:08:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1413809409-8569-5-git-send-email-vandana.kannan@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Vandana Kannan Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 06:20:06PM +0530, Vandana Kannan wrote: > Actually set values into PPS related registers. This implementation is > equivalent to intel_dp_panel_power_sequencer_registers where the values > saved intially are written into registers. > > Signed-off-by: Vandana Kannan > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 80 ++------------------------------------ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 3 ++ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > index a433c5f..ca11eb1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c > @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ unpack_aux(uint32_t src, uint8_t *dst, int dst_bytes) > } > > /* hrawclock is 1/4 the FSB frequency */ > -static int > +int > intel_hrawclk(struct drm_device *dev) > { > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; > @@ -281,11 +281,6 @@ intel_hrawclk(struct drm_device *dev) > } > } > > -static void > -intel_dp_init_panel_power_sequencer_registers(struct drm_device *dev, > - struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > - struct edp_power_seq *out); > - > static void pps_lock(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) > { > struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp); > @@ -4716,76 +4711,6 @@ static void intel_dp_init_panel_power_timestamps(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) > intel_dp->last_backlight_off = jiffies; > } > > -static void > -intel_dp_init_panel_power_sequencer_registers(struct drm_device *dev, > - struct intel_dp *intel_dp, > - struct edp_power_seq *seq) Hm, moving this function looks like it would be clearer as part of patch 1? Otherwise I've done a (very) quick read-through of your series and on a high level it looks sane I think. So please sign someone up for the detailed review (and make sure that person is aware of that AR) so I can merge this. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch