[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix EDID/sink-based bpp clamping

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Since this is run in the compute config stage we need to check the new_ pointers, not the current modeset layout. Also there was a little logic bug in properly skipping connectors. This has been broken when moving the pipe bpp selection in commit 4e53c2e010e531b4a014692199e978482d471c7e Author: Da

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix EDID/sink-based bpp clamping

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Since this is run in the compute config stage we need to check the new_ pointers, not the current modeset layout. Also there was a little logic bug in properly skipping connectors. This has been broken when moving the pipe bpp selection in commit 4e53c2e010e531b4a014692199e978482d471c7e Author: Da

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: fixed EDID/sink-based bpp clamping

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 06:52:39PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 07:45:55PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Since this is run in the compute config stage we need to check > > the new_ pointers, not the current modeset layout. Also there > > was a little logic bug in properly

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: fixed EDID/sink-based bpp clamping

2013-06-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 07:45:55PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Since this is run in the compute config stage we need to check > the new_ pointers, not the current modeset layout. Also there > was a little logic bug in properly skipping connectors. This has > been broken when moving the pipe bpp s

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: fixed EDID/sink-based bpp clamping

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Since this is run in the compute config stage we need to check the new_ pointers, not the current modeset layout. Also there was a little logic bug in properly skipping connectors. This has been broken when moving the pipe bpp selection in commit 4e53c2e010e531b4a014692199e978482d471c7e Author: Da

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: enable 30bpp for DP outputs

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
We always limited the link bw calculations to 24bpp. Tested with my shiny new high-bpc screen, seems to work as advertised. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drive

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: hw state readout support for pixel_multiplier

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Incomplete since ilk+ support needs proper pch dpll tracking first. SDVO get_config parts based on a patch from Jesse Barnes, but fixed up to actually work. Cc: Jesse Barnes Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 25 + drivers/gpu/drm/i91

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: set default value for config->pixel_multiplier

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
This way we can simplify the code quite a bit. Also add a WARN in the sdvo code to complain about a bogus value and kill the readout code in intel_ddi.c that Jesse sneaked in. HW state readout for the pixel multiplier will work a bit differently in the end. v2: Rebase on top of the fdi pixel mutl

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: check for strange pfit pipe assignemnt on ivb/hsw

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Panel fitters on ivb/hsw are not created equal since not all of them support the new high-quality upscaling mode. To offset this the hw allows us to freely assign the pfits to pipes. Since our code currently doesn't support this we might fall over when taking over firmware state. So check for this

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/7] drm/i915: Drop some no longer required mode/adjusted_mode parameters

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
We can get at this easily through intel_crtc->config now. v2: Drop more stuff gcc spotted. v3: Drop even more stuff gcc spotted. v4: Yet more ... Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 24 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 16 deletions(

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/7] drm/i915: refactor cpu eDP PLL handling a bit

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
This prepares a bit for the next big patch, where we switch the semantics of the different clocks in the pipe config around. Since I've broken cpu eDP PLL handling in the first version I've figured some refactoring is in order. Split out on request from Paulo Zanoni. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/7] drm/i915: store adjusted dotclock in adjusted_mode->clock

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
... not the port clock. This allows us to kill the funny semantics around pixel_target_clock. Since the dpll code still needs the real port clock, add a new port_clock field to the pipe configuration. Handling the default case for that one is a bit tricky, since encoders might not consistently ove

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/7] drm/i915: move find_pll callback to dev_priv->display

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Now that the DP madness is cleared out, this is all only per-platform. So move it out from the intel clock limits structure. While at it drop the intel prefix on the static functions, call the vtable entry find_dpll (since it's for the display pll) and rip out the now unnecessary forward declarati

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/7] drm/i915: clear up the fdi dotclock semantics for M/N computation

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
We currently mutliply the link_bw of the fdi link with the pixel multiplier, which is wrong: The FDI link doesn't suddenly grow more bandwidth. In reality the pixel mutliplication only happens in the PCH, before the pixels are fed into the port. But since we our code treats the uses the target clo

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7] drm/i915: split out intel_pnv_find_best_PLL

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Pineview is just different. Also split out i9xx_clock from intel_clock and drop the now redundant struct device * parameter. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 92 ++-- 1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff -

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/7] adjusted mode rework and assorted patches

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi all, So Paulo asked me to split out two prep patches and I've figured I might as well reorder the series a bit to make more sense. The check for strange pfit assignements is still in here, but still for Mika to review. Otherwise I think Paulo volunteered himself to have a good look at this. C

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Unpin stolen pages

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 11:17:10AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Chris Wilson >> wrote: >> > That neatly explains the WARN. Not too happy about accumulating lots of >> > backing storage specific processing int

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Unpin stolen pages

2013-06-01 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 11:17:10AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > > That neatly explains the WARN. Not too happy about accumulating lots of > > backing storage specific processing into free_object, but that can be > > fixed up later (there is an

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Unpin stolen pages

2013-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:46:20PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> The way the stolen handling works is we take a pin on the backing pages, >> but we never actually get a reference to the bo. On freeing objects >> allocated with stolen memory, th