[Nouveau] [PATCH 2/2] clk/gf100: allow users to enable reclocking

[Samuel Pitoiset]

On 09/24/2015 12:00 AM, Martin Peres wrote:
> On 24/09/15 00:20, Samuel Pitoiset wrote:
>> Only the core clock is currently supported.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoiset at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/clk/gf100.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/clk/gf100.c 
>> b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/clk/gf100.c
>> index a52b7e7..807305a 100644
>> --- a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/clk/gf100.c
>> +++ b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/clk/gf100.c
>> @@ -462,5 +462,5 @@ gf100_clk_new(struct nvkm_device *device, int 
>> index, struct nvkm_clk **pclk)
>>           return -ENOMEM;
>>       *pclk = &clk->base;
>>   -    return nvkm_clk_ctor(&gf100_clk, device, index, false, 
>> &clk->base);
>> +    return nvkm_clk_ctor(&gf100_clk, device, index, true, &clk->base);
>>   }
> What changed that suddenly made reclocking OK? You really need to 
> prove it is and a few hours of testing are not enough ;)
>
> Make sure that the clock tree is parsed correctly, then programmed 
> correctly. Make sure that reclocking while the card is being used is 
> also kind of stable, at least on your card.
>
> After that, you may enable it and test on more Fermis. Until then, 
> this patch is premature, at best.

Yeah, this is probably a kind of experimental feature for now, but even 
if I didn't check a lot, it seems to be stable (with heaven at least).

Anyways, I'll do more checks to prove that is going to work as expected.

Thanks for your feedbacks Martin.