[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: Handle cdclk limits on broadwell.

[Chris Wilson]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:29:03AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> As the comment indicates this can only fail gracefully when
> called from compute_config. Fortunately this is now what's happening,
> so the fixme can be removed and the DRM_ERROR downgraded.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 10 +++-------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> index 351ecb69e5eb..3c46037b6e55 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> @@ -9677,14 +9677,10 @@ static int broadwell_modeset_calc_cdclk(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
>  	else
>  		cdclk = 337500;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * FIXME move the cdclk caclulation to
> -	 * compute_config() so we can fail gracegully.
> -	 */
>  	if (cdclk > dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq) {
> -		DRM_ERROR("requested cdclk (%d kHz) exceeds max (%d kHz)\n",
> -			  cdclk, dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq);
> -		cdclk = dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq;
> +		DRM_INFO("requested cdclk (%d kHz) exceeds max (%d kHz)\n",
> +			 cdclk, dev_priv->max_cdclk_freq);

This is a validation step, right? So the invalid value is never applied
to hardware and so doesn't really exist for anybody but the calling
userspace. Ergo, this shouldn't be logged for the user but only when
debugging the application -> DRM_DEBUG_KMS

Dreaming of an application-centric debug log,
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre