From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [Intel-gfx] [CI 02/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_cdclk.c
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 00:18:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210727071845.841554-2-lucas.demarchi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210727071845.841554-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
The only real platform with DISPLAY_VER == 10 is GLK, so we don't need
any checks and supporting code for CNL. Remove code and rename
functions/macros accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 72 +++++-----------------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 4 +-
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
index ff35c29508d5..34fa4130d5c4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
@@ -1195,17 +1195,6 @@ static const struct intel_cdclk_vals glk_cdclk_table[] = {
{}
};
-static const struct intel_cdclk_vals cnl_cdclk_table[] = {
- { .refclk = 19200, .cdclk = 168000, .divider = 4, .ratio = 35 },
- { .refclk = 19200, .cdclk = 336000, .divider = 2, .ratio = 35 },
- { .refclk = 19200, .cdclk = 528000, .divider = 2, .ratio = 55 },
-
- { .refclk = 24000, .cdclk = 168000, .divider = 4, .ratio = 28 },
- { .refclk = 24000, .cdclk = 336000, .divider = 2, .ratio = 28 },
- { .refclk = 24000, .cdclk = 528000, .divider = 2, .ratio = 44 },
- {}
-};
-
static const struct intel_cdclk_vals icl_cdclk_table[] = {
{ .refclk = 19200, .cdclk = 172800, .divider = 2, .ratio = 18 },
{ .refclk = 19200, .cdclk = 192000, .divider = 2, .ratio = 20 },
@@ -1339,16 +1328,6 @@ static u8 bxt_calc_voltage_level(int cdclk)
return DIV_ROUND_UP(cdclk, 25000);
}
-static u8 cnl_calc_voltage_level(int cdclk)
-{
- if (cdclk > 336000)
- return 2;
- else if (cdclk > 168000)
- return 1;
- else
- return 0;
-}
-
static u8 icl_calc_voltage_level(int cdclk)
{
if (cdclk > 556800)
@@ -1383,15 +1362,6 @@ static u8 tgl_calc_voltage_level(int cdclk)
return 0;
}
-static void cnl_readout_refclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
- struct intel_cdclk_config *cdclk_config)
-{
- if (intel_de_read(dev_priv, SKL_DSSM) & CNL_DSSM_CDCLK_PLL_REFCLK_24MHz)
- cdclk_config->ref = 24000;
- else
- cdclk_config->ref = 19200;
-}
-
static void icl_readout_refclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct intel_cdclk_config *cdclk_config)
{
@@ -1422,8 +1392,6 @@ static void bxt_de_pll_readout(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
cdclk_config->ref = 38400;
else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11)
icl_readout_refclk(dev_priv, cdclk_config);
- else if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv))
- cnl_readout_refclk(dev_priv, cdclk_config);
else
cdclk_config->ref = 19200;
@@ -1439,11 +1407,11 @@ static void bxt_de_pll_readout(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
}
/*
- * CNL+ have the ratio directly in the PLL enable register, gen9lp had
- * it in a separate PLL control register.
+ * DISPLAY_VER >= 11 have the ratio directly in the PLL enable register,
+ * gen9lp had it in a separate PLL control register.
*/
- if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 || IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv))
- ratio = val & CNL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO_MASK;
+ if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11)
+ ratio = val & ICL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO_MASK;
else
ratio = intel_de_read(dev_priv, BXT_DE_PLL_CTL) & BXT_DE_PLL_RATIO_MASK;
@@ -1530,7 +1498,7 @@ static void bxt_de_pll_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int vco)
dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco = vco;
}
-static void cnl_cdclk_pll_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
+static void icl_cdclk_pll_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
{
intel_de_rmw(dev_priv, BXT_DE_PLL_ENABLE,
BXT_DE_PLL_PLL_ENABLE, 0);
@@ -1542,12 +1510,12 @@ static void cnl_cdclk_pll_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco = 0;
}
-static void cnl_cdclk_pll_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int vco)
+static void icl_cdclk_pll_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int vco)
{
int ratio = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(vco, dev_priv->cdclk.hw.ref);
u32 val;
- val = CNL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(ratio);
+ val = ICL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(ratio);
intel_de_write(dev_priv, BXT_DE_PLL_ENABLE, val);
val |= BXT_DE_PLL_PLL_ENABLE;
@@ -1566,7 +1534,7 @@ static void adlp_cdclk_pll_crawl(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int vco)
u32 val;
/* Write PLL ratio without disabling */
- val = CNL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(ratio) | BXT_DE_PLL_PLL_ENABLE;
+ val = ICL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(ratio) | BXT_DE_PLL_PLL_ENABLE;
intel_de_write(dev_priv, BXT_DE_PLL_ENABLE, val);
/* Submit freq change request */
@@ -1635,7 +1603,7 @@ static void bxt_set_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
int ret;
/* Inform power controller of upcoming frequency change. */
- if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 || IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv))
+ if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11)
ret = skl_pcode_request(dev_priv, SKL_PCODE_CDCLK_CONTROL,
SKL_CDCLK_PREPARE_FOR_CHANGE,
SKL_CDCLK_READY_FOR_CHANGE,
@@ -1659,13 +1627,13 @@ static void bxt_set_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
if (HAS_CDCLK_CRAWL(dev_priv) && dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco > 0 && vco > 0) {
if (dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != vco)
adlp_cdclk_pll_crawl(dev_priv, vco);
- } else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 || IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv)) {
+ } else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11) {
if (dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != 0 &&
dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != vco)
- cnl_cdclk_pll_disable(dev_priv);
+ icl_cdclk_pll_disable(dev_priv);
if (dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != vco)
- cnl_cdclk_pll_enable(dev_priv, vco);
+ icl_cdclk_pll_enable(dev_priv, vco);
} else {
if (dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != 0 &&
dev_priv->cdclk.hw.vco != vco)
@@ -1691,7 +1659,7 @@ static void bxt_set_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
if (pipe != INVALID_PIPE)
intel_wait_for_vblank(dev_priv, pipe);
- if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 || IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv)) {
+ if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11) {
ret = sandybridge_pcode_write(dev_priv, SKL_PCODE_CDCLK_CONTROL,
cdclk_config->voltage_level);
} else {
@@ -1716,7 +1684,7 @@ static void bxt_set_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
intel_update_cdclk(dev_priv);
- if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11 || IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv))
+ if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) >= 11)
/*
* Can't read out the voltage level :(
* Let's just assume everything is as expected.
@@ -2125,7 +2093,7 @@ int intel_crtc_compute_min_cdclk(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
crtc_state->port_clock >= 540000 &&
crtc_state->lane_count == 4) {
if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == 10) {
- /* Display WA #1145: glk,cnl */
+ /* Display WA #1145: glk */
min_cdclk = max(316800, min_cdclk);
} else if (DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == 9 || IS_BROADWELL(dev_priv)) {
/* Display WA #1144: skl,bxt */
@@ -2246,7 +2214,7 @@ static int intel_compute_min_cdclk(struct intel_cdclk_state *cdclk_state)
/*
* Account for port clock min voltage level requirements.
- * This only really does something on CNL+ but can be
+ * This only really does something on DISPLA_VER >= 11 but can be
* called on earlier platforms as well.
*
* Note that this functions assumes that 0 is
@@ -2660,8 +2628,6 @@ void intel_update_max_cdclk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq = 648000;
else
dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq = 652800;
- } else if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv)) {
- dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq = 528000;
} else if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv)) {
dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq = 316800;
} else if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) {
@@ -2925,12 +2891,6 @@ void intel_init_cdclk_hooks(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
dev_priv->display.modeset_calc_cdclk = bxt_modeset_calc_cdclk;
dev_priv->display.calc_voltage_level = icl_calc_voltage_level;
dev_priv->cdclk.table = icl_cdclk_table;
- } else if (IS_CANNONLAKE(dev_priv)) {
- dev_priv->display.bw_calc_min_cdclk = skl_bw_calc_min_cdclk;
- dev_priv->display.set_cdclk = bxt_set_cdclk;
- dev_priv->display.modeset_calc_cdclk = bxt_modeset_calc_cdclk;
- dev_priv->display.calc_voltage_level = cnl_calc_voltage_level;
- dev_priv->cdclk.table = cnl_cdclk_table;
} else if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv) || IS_BROXTON(dev_priv)) {
dev_priv->display.bw_calc_min_cdclk = skl_bw_calc_min_cdclk;
dev_priv->display.set_cdclk = bxt_set_cdclk;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
index f01821d70155..d63d460e5d11 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
@@ -11043,8 +11043,8 @@ enum skl_power_gate {
#define BXT_DE_PLL_LOCK (1 << 30)
#define BXT_DE_PLL_FREQ_REQ (1 << 23)
#define BXT_DE_PLL_FREQ_REQ_ACK (1 << 22)
-#define CNL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(x) (x)
-#define CNL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO_MASK 0xff
+#define ICL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO(x) (x)
+#define ICL_CDCLK_PLL_RATIO_MASK 0xff
/* GEN9 DC */
#define DC_STATE_EN _MMIO(0x45504)
--
2.31.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-27 7:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-27 7:18 [Intel-gfx] [CI 01/28] drm/i915/display: remove PORT_F workaround for CNL Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` Lucas De Marchi [this message]
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 03/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_color.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 04/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_combo_phy.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 05/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_crtc.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 06/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_ddi.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 07/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_display_debugfs.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 08/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_dmc.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 09/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_dp.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 10/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_dpll_mgr.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 11/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_vdsc.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 12/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from skl_universal_plane.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 13/28] drm/i915/display: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_display_power.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 14/28] drm/i915/display: remove CNL ddi buf translation tables Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 15/28] drm/i915/display: rename CNL references in skl_scaler.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 16/28] drm/i915: remove explicit CNL handling from i915_irq.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 17/28] drm/i915: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_pm.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 18/28] drm/i915: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_mocs.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 19/28] drm/i915: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_pch.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 20/28] drm/i915: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_wopcm.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 21/28] drm/i915/gt: remove explicit CNL handling from intel_sseu.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 22/28] drm/i915: rename CNL references in intel_dram.c Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 23/28] drm/i915/gt: rename CNL references in intel_engine.h Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 24/28] drm/i915: finish removal of CNL Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 25/28] drm/i915: remove GRAPHICS_VER == 10 Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 26/28] drm/i915: rename/remove CNL registers Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 27/28] drm/i915: replace random CNL comments Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [CI 28/28] drm/i915: switch num_scalers/num_sprites to consider DISPLAY_VER Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 16:45 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2.1] " Lucas De Marchi
2021-07-27 7:34 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [CI,01/28] drm/i915/display: remove PORT_F workaround for CNL Patchwork
2021-07-27 7:35 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-07-27 8:02 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-07-27 13:48 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-07-27 17:49 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [CI,01/28] drm/i915/display: remove PORT_F workaround for CNL (rev2) Patchwork
2021-07-27 17:51 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-07-27 18:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-07-28 3:23 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
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=20210727071845.841554-2-lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--to=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).