[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 1/2] drm/i915: Disable/Enable PM Intrrupts based on the current freq.

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:35:05PM +0530, deepak.s at intel.com wrote:
> > From: Deepak S <deepak.s at intel.com>
> > 
> > When current delay is already at max delay, Let's disable the PM UP
> > THRESHOLD INTRRUPTS, so that we will not get further interrupts until
> > current delay is less than max delay, Also request for the PM DOWN
> > THRESHOLD INTRRUPTS to indicate the decrease in clock freq. and
> > viceversa for PM DOWN THRESHOLD INTRRUPTS.
> > 
> > v2: Use bool variables (Daniel)
> > 
> > v3: Fix Interrupt masking bit (Deepak)
> > 
> > v4: Use existing symbolic constants in i915_reg.h (Daniel)
> > 
> > v5: Add pm interrupt mask after new_delay calculation (Ville)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Deepak S <deepak.s at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h |  3 +++
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c |  3 +++
> >  3 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 56c720b..f19de66 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -943,6 +943,9 @@ struct intel_gen6_power_mgmt {
> >  	u8 rp0_delay;
> >  	u8 hw_max;
> >  
> > +	bool rp_up_masked;
> > +	bool rp_down_masked;
> > +
> >  	int last_adj;
> >  	enum { LOW_POWER, BETWEEN, HIGH_POWER } power;
> >  
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> > index 01a8686..69a5214 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> > @@ -972,6 +972,43 @@ static void notify_ring(struct drm_device *dev,
> >  	i915_queue_hangcheck(dev);
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void gen6_set_pm_mask(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > +						u32 pm_iir, int *new_delay)
> 
> Just a minor nit here. We don't modify new_delay in this function, so
> passing by value would be better.

I've fixed this up and merged the patch. I've also polished the whitespace
a bit, please run patches through scripts/checkpatch.pl before submitting.
I usually don't all go whitespace-nazi about this, but generally the
suggestions result in more uniform and hence readable sources.

> Otherwise the patch looks good to me. So if you change that, you can
> add:
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>

Thanks, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch