[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Don't use GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ on gen10+

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 02:29:29PM +0000, David Weinehall wrote:
> GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ is deprecated for >= gen10;
> don't try to program it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 11 +++++++----
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index 07118c0b69d3..9f0ca3ae28f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -6568,11 +6568,14 @@ static void gen9_enable_rps(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>  {
>  	intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
>  
> -	/* Program defaults and thresholds for RPS*/
> -	I915_WRITE(GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ,
> -		GEN9_FREQUENCY(dev_priv->gt_pm.rps.rp1_freq));
> +	/* Program defaults and thresholds for RPS */
> +
> +	/* GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ is deprecated for >= gen10 */
> +	if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) == 9)

I believe if we use INTEL_GEN < 10 we can avoid the comment.

I noticed now that we have nowadays other cases with INTEL_GEN == <num>
so I wonder if this is our new trend or if we should stop doing this
and use our old IS_GEN<num> everywhere as possible... in this case IS_GEN9.

I won't niptick on those... since the content itself of this patch
is right according to the PM specs. So, one way or another fell free
to use:

Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>

> +		I915_WRITE(GEN6_RC_VIDEO_FREQ,
> +			GEN9_FREQUENCY(dev_priv->gt_pm.rps.rp1_freq));
>  
> -	/* 1 second timeout*/
> +	/* 1 second timeout */
>  	I915_WRITE(GEN6_RP_DOWN_TIMEOUT,
>  		GT_INTERVAL_FROM_US(dev_priv, 1000000));
>  
> -- 
> 2.15.0
>