On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Michel D?nzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote:
> On Mit, 2012-08-29 at 20:02 -0400, alexdeucher at gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher at amd.com>
>>
>> Was using the DCE41 code which was wrong. Fixes
>> blank displays on a number of Trinity systems.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher at amd.com>
>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_encoders.c | 31
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> 1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_encoders.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_encoders.c
>> index 4a7f95e..6e8803a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_encoders.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/atombios_encoders.c
>> @@ -1769,13 +1769,34 @@ static int radeon_atom_pick_dig_encoder(struct
>> drm_encoder *encoder)
>> struct radeon_crtc *radeon_crtc = to_radeon_crtc(encoder->crtc);
>> struct radeon_encoder *radeon_encoder = to_radeon_encoder(encoder);
>> struct drm_encoder *test_encoder;
>> - struct radeon_encoder_atom_dig *dig;
>> + struct radeon_encoder_atom_dig *dig = radeon_encoder->enc_priv;
>> uint32_t dig_enc_in_use = 0;
>>
>> - /* DCE4/5 */
>> - if (ASIC_IS_DCE4(rdev)) {
>> - dig = radeon_encoder->enc_priv;
>> - if (ASIC_IS_DCE41(rdev)) {
>> + if (ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) {
>> + /* DCE6 */
>> + switch (radeon_encoder->encoder_id) {
>> + case ENCODER_OBJECT_ID_INTERNAL_UNIPHY:
>> + if (dig->linkb)
>> + return 1;
>> + else
>> + return 0;
>> + break;
>> + case ENCODER_OBJECT_ID_INTERNAL_UNIPHY1:
>> + if (dig->linkb)
>> + return 3;
>> + else
>> + return 2;
>> + break;
>> + case ENCODER_OBJECT_ID_INTERNAL_UNIPHY2:
>> + if (dig->linkb)
>> + return 5;
>> + else
>> + return 4;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + } else if (ASIC_IS_DCE4(rdev)) {
>> + /* DCE4/5 */
>> + if (ASIC_IS_DCE41(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE61(rdev)) {
>
> The !ASIC_IS_DCE61(rdev) seems redundant here. Either way though,
>
whoops, yes, it is. I was considering whether to add a !DCE61 check
or a new DCE6 section and decided the latter was cleaner, but never
removed the other check. Oh well. I'll clean it up later. Thanks!
> Reviewed-by: Michel D?nzer <michel.daenzer at amd.com>
>
>
> --
> Earthling Michel D?nzer | http://www.amd.com
> Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer
