[PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Attempt to fix watermark setup on 85x

[PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Attempt to fix watermark setup on 85x

[Adam Jackson]

IS_MOBILE() catches 85x, so we'd always try to use the 9xx FIFO sizing;
since there's an explicit 85x version, this seems wrong.

Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <ajax@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c |    7 ++++---
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
index 9fdea06..cd87e3b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
@@ -5263,11 +5263,12 @@ static void intel_init_display(struct drm_device *dev)
 		dev_priv->display.update_wm = i965_update_wm;
 	else if (IS_I9XX(dev) || IS_MOBILE(dev)) {
 		dev_priv->display.update_wm = i9xx_update_wm;
-		dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i9xx_get_fifo_size;
-	} else {
 		if (IS_I85X(dev))
 			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i85x_get_fifo_size;
-		else if (IS_845G(dev))
+		else
+			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i9xx_get_fifo_size;
+	} else {
+		if (IS_845G(dev))
 			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i845_get_fifo_size;
 		else
 			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i830_get_fifo_size;
-- 
1.6.6.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Attempt to fix watermark setup on 85x

[ykzhao]

On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 02:03 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
> IS_MOBILE() catches 85x, so we'd always try to use the 9xx FIFO sizing;
> since there's an explicit 85x version, this seems wrong.

Right. It seems that the incorrect get_fifo_size callback function is
used for 85x.

It seems that the i830 is also covered by the IS_MOBILE and then
incorrect watermark callback function is used for I830.

thanks
   Yakui
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <ajax@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c |    7 ++++---
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> index 9fdea06..cd87e3b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> @@ -5263,11 +5263,12 @@ static void intel_init_display(struct drm_device *dev)
>  		dev_priv->display.update_wm = i965_update_wm;
>  	else if (IS_I9XX(dev) || IS_MOBILE(dev)) {
>  		dev_priv->display.update_wm = i9xx_update_wm;
> -		dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i9xx_get_fifo_size;
> -	} else {
>  		if (IS_I85X(dev))
>  			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i85x_get_fifo_size;
> -		else if (IS_845G(dev))
> +		else
> +			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i9xx_get_fifo_size;
> +	} else {
> +		if (IS_845G(dev))
>  			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i845_get_fifo_size;
>  		else
>  			dev_priv->display.get_fifo_size = i830_get_fifo_size;

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Attempt to fix watermark setup on 85x

[Adam Jackson]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 521 bytes --]

On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 10:24 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 02:03 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > IS_MOBILE() catches 85x, so we'd always try to use the 9xx FIFO sizing;
> > since there's an explicit 85x version, this seems wrong.
> 
> Right. It seems that the incorrect get_fifo_size callback function is
> used for 85x.
> 
> It seems that the i830 is also covered by the IS_MOBILE and then
> incorrect watermark callback function is used for I830.

So it is.  Correct patch to follow.

- ajax

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 159 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx