[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Assume no scaling is available when things are not as expected
Daniel Vetter
daniel at ffwll.ch
Mon Jun 15 03:46:17 PDT 2015
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 01:04:37PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>
> Cdclk < crtc_clock is not allowed and suggests a different problem elsewhere.
>
> It is more robust and safe to assume no scaling is possible in this case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> index 93a5e51..4c99373 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> @@ -13234,7 +13234,7 @@ skl_max_scale(struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc, struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state
> crtc_clock = crtc_state->base.adjusted_mode.crtc_clock;
> cdclk = dev_priv->display.get_display_clock_speed(dev);
Probably fallout from the in-flight dynamic cdclk stuff - this code checks
the wrong bits I guess. Chandra?
Thanks, Daniel
>
> - if (!crtc_clock || !cdclk)
> + if (!crtc_clock || !cdclk || (cdclk < crtc_clock))
> return DRM_PLANE_HELPER_NO_SCALING;
>
> /*
> --
> 2.4.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list