Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 05:11:53PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-u

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:59, Eugeni Dodonov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 13:11, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> From: Jesse Barnes >> >> PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just >> treat them as part of the pipe. >> >> So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separat

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:11:53 +0100 Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-use ex

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 13:11, Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-use existing

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

From: Jesse Barnes PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. v2: add num_pch_pll fiel

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

From: Jesse Barnes PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. v2: add num_pch_pll fiel

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 05:59, Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-use existing

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

From: Jesse Barnes PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. v2: add num_pch_pll fiel

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 08:48:40AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:30:58 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > QA reported that this blows up: > > > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/process_bug.cgi > > Which bug? Duuh. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48950 /me grabs a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:30:58 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > QA reported that this blows up: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/process_bug.cgi Which bug? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@li

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:36:08PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:24:38PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > From: Jesse Barnes > > > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > > treat them as part of the pipe. > > > > So split the code out an

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:24:38PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-u

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:24:38 +0100 Chris Wilson wrote: > From: Jesse Barnes > > PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just > treat them as part of the pipe. > > So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them > when needed or trying to re-use ex

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

From: Jesse Barnes PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. v2: add num_pch_pll fiel

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. v2: add num_pch_pll field to dev_priv (Daniel

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: manage PCH PLLs separately from pipes

PCH PLLs aren't required for outputs on the CPU, so we shouldn't just treat them as part of the pipe. So split the code out and manage PCH PLLs separately, allocating them when needed or trying to re-use existing PCH PLL setups when the timings match. Fixes https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.c