On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Dave Gordon wrote:
> But since INTEL_INFO() can take 'dev_priv' as a parameter (as an
> alternative to 'dev'), all the uses of 'dev' here could be replaced by
> 'dev_priv' and then the parameter changed to pass that directly, thus
> potentially eliminating quite a few extra me
On 10/06/15 09:09, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Jun 2015, Dave Gordon wrote:
>> Regardless of whether it's used, we have an inconsistency between the
>> definitions of PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X -- one includes the
>> mmio_offset and the other doesn't.
>
> It's not inconsistent, it's cons
On Tue, 09 Jun 2015, Dave Gordon wrote:
> Regardless of whether it's used, we have an inconsistency between the
> definitions of PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X -- one includes the
> mmio_offset and the other doesn't.
It's not inconsistent, it's consistent on another level:
We've settled on incl
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 04:01:29PM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote:
> On 05/06/15 14:08, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:00:24PM +0100, Minu Mathai wrote:
> >> From: Minu
> >>
> >> Display CRCs were not readable because the register defintions
> >> for PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X
On 05/06/15 14:08, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:00:24PM +0100, Minu Mathai wrote:
>> From: Minu
>>
>> Display CRCs were not readable because the register defintions
>> for PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X were wrong.
>> MMIO offset needs to be added to these register offsets to
; From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nik...@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 2:48 PM
> To: Mathai, Minu; Ville Syrjälä
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correcting the reg
> definitions for PORT_DFT
>
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2015,
lto:jani.nik...@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 2:48 PM
> To: Mathai, Minu; Ville Syrjälä
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correcting the reg definitions for
> PORT_DFT
>
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2015, "Mathai, Minu"
ginal Message-
From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nik...@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 2:48 PM
To: Mathai, Minu; Ville Syrjälä
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correcting the reg definitions for
PORT_DFT
On Mon, 08 Jun 2015, "Ma
-
> From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 2:08 PM
> To: Mathai, Minu
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correcting the reg definitions for
> PORT_DFT
>
> On Fri, Jun 05,
This change is needed for some hardware composer tests in chv.
-Original Message-
From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 2:08 PM
To: Mathai, Minu
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Correcting the
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:00:24PM +0100, Minu Mathai wrote:
> From: Minu
>
> Display CRCs were not readable because the register defintions
> for PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X were wrong.
> MMIO offset needs to be added to these register offsets to fix them.
>
> Issue: GMINL-6869
> Signed-off
From: Minu
Display CRCs were not readable because the register defintions
for PORT_DFT_I9XX and PORT_DFT2_G4X were wrong.
MMIO offset needs to be added to these register offsets to fix them.
Issue: GMINL-6869
Signed-off-by: Minu Mathai
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 2 +-
1 file changed
12 matches
Mail list logo
