On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 09:23:48AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 07:43:53AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:03:02PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > >On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter
> > ><[1]daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > >
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 07:43:53AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:03:02PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter
> ><[1]daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > static void intel_edp_psr_enable_sink(struct intel_dp *intel_
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:03:02PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter
><[1]daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> static void intel_edp_psr_enable_sink(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> @@ -1911,9 +1906,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_exit(struct drm_devi
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter
wrote:
> Due to runtime pm and system s/r we need to restore hw state every
> time we enable a pipe again. Hence trying to avoid that is just
> pointless book-keeping which Rodrigo then tried to work around by
> manually adding psr_setup calls to ou
Due to runtime pm and system s/r we need to restore hw state every
time we enable a pipe again. Hence trying to avoid that is just
pointless book-keeping which Rodrigo then tried to work around by
manually adding psr_setup calls to our resume code.
Much simpler to just remove code instead.
Cc: Ro
