On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:32:21 +0800, Zhenyu Wang <zhen...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > From: Zhao Yakui <yakui.z...@intel.com> > > This one adds support for eDP that connected on PCH DP-D port > instead of CPU DP-A port, and only DP-D port could be used for eDP. > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27220 > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui <yakui.z...@intel.com> > Tested-by: Jan-Hendrik Zab <j...@jhz.name> > Tested-by: Templar <temp...@rshc.de> > Signed-off-by: Zhenyu Wang <zhen...@linux.intel.com> > --- [snip] > static void > -intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bytes_per_pixel, > +intel_dp_compute_m_n(int bpp, > int nlanes, > int pixel_clock, > int link_clock, > struct intel_dp_m_n *m_n) > { > m_n->tu = 64; > - m_n->gmch_m = pixel_clock * bytes_per_pixel; > + m_n->gmch_m = (pixel_clock * bpp) >> 3; > m_n->gmch_n = link_clock * nlanes; > intel_reduce_ratio(&m_n->gmch_m, &m_n->gmch_n); > m_n->link_m = pixel_clock;
This rounds the gmch_m down. Is this correct? And how close to overflow is pixel_clock today? -ickle -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
