On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:04:23PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Currently we don't call valleyview_set_rps() when changing the min/max
> limits through sysfs if the current frequency is still within the new
> limits. However that means we sometimes forget to update PMINTRMSK.
> Eg. if the current frequency is at the old minimum, and then we reduce
> the minum further we should then enable the 'down' interrupts in PMINTRMSK
> but currently we don't.
> 
> Fix it up by always calling valleyview_set_rps() (just like we do for
> !vlv/chv platforms). This also allows the code to be simplified a bit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> +     /* We still need *_set_rps to process the new min_delay and
> +      * update the interrupt limits and PMINTRMSK even though
> +      * frequency request may be unchanged. */
> +     if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev))
> +             valleyview_set_rps(dev, val);
> +     else
> +             gen6_set_rps(dev, val);

Another peeve of mine is this split and all callers having to
choose which version to use. intel_rps_set_freq() please.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to