<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [drm:ironlake_crtc_compute_clock [i915]] *ERROR* Couldn't find PLL settings for mode!" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97363#c2">Comment # 2</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [drm:ironlake_crtc_compute_clock [i915]] *ERROR* Couldn't find PLL settings for mode!" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97363">bug 97363</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:rm1990@gmx.de" title="Robin Müller <rm1990@gmx.de>"> Robin Müller</a> <pre>I added some logging to the intel_display.c for both linux-4.6 and linux-4.7. While running these customized kernels I figured out the following: In both cases the same methods are called. So my first assumption was wrong, that in linux-4.6 maybe a different method then g4x_find_best_dpll was used for calculating the PLL. But I found a difference in the values passed to this method. The value of the parameter target is 100400 using linux-4.6 and 25180 using linux-4.7. As the code of the method g4x_find_best_dpll hasn't changed between these 2 versions, I'd say the different input value causes the bug. At the moment I haven't found the location where the value for target (crtc_state->port_clock) comes from but it's not that easy navigating through the code just using vim. If I find some time tomorrow I'll try how well IntelliJ can handle C projects to find the cause for the different values for the crtc_state->port_clock Furthermore I hope this information is useful for somebody else to dig into this issue.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>