On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:55:01 +0200
Peter Rosin <p...@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 <p...@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
