From be7f1e6cf7cd5c22a086a2bc90926f1d8dc15cb4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ville=20Syrj=C3=A4l=C3=A4?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 23:43:01 +0200
Subject: drm/i915: Store the /5 target clock in struct dpll on vlv/chv
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Git-commit: 9ca48a806cf241e9fe374206b8b0dd9c80ccdde3
Patch-mainline: v5.19-rc1
References: jsc#PED-1166 jsc#PED-1168 jsc#PED-1170 jsc#PED-1218 jsc#PED-1220 jsc#PED-1222 jsc#PED-1223 jsc#PED-1225
Unify vlv/chv with earlier platforms so that the sturct dpll::dot
represents the /5 clock frequency (ie. DP symbol rate or HDMI
TMDS rate) rather than the *5 fast clock (/2 of the bitrate).
Makes life a little less confusing to get the same number back
in .dot which we fed into the DPLL algorithm.
v2: Actually just include the 5x in the final P divider
Do the same change to the hand rolled gvt code
v3: Missed a few *5 in *_find_best_dpll()
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20220309214301.22899-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Acked-by: Patrik Jakobsson <pjakobsson@suse.de>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c
index 0ae37fdbf2a5..53184154bc5d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c
@@ -254,12 +254,12 @@ static const struct intel_limit ilk_limits_dual_lvds_100m = {
static const struct intel_limit intel_limits_vlv = {
/*
- * These are the data rate limits (measured in fast clocks)
+ * These are based on the data rate limits (measured in fast clocks)
* since those are the strictest limits we have. The fast
* clock and actual rate limits are more relaxed, so checking
* them would make no difference.
*/
- .dot = { .min = 25000 * 5, .max = 270000 * 5 },
+ .dot = { .min = 25000, .max = 270000 },
.vco = { .min = 4000000, .max = 6000000 },
.n = { .min = 1, .max = 7 },
.m1 = { .min = 2, .max = 3 },
@@ -270,12 +270,12 @@ static const struct intel_limit intel_limits_vlv = {
static const struct intel_limit intel_limits_chv = {
/*
- * These are the data rate limits (measured in fast clocks)
+ * These are based on the data rate limits (measured in fast clocks)
* since those are the strictest limits we have. The fast
* clock and actual rate limits are more relaxed, so checking
* them would make no difference.
*/
- .dot = { .min = 25000 * 5, .max = 540000 * 5},
+ .dot = { .min = 25000, .max = 540000 },
.vco = { .min = 4800000, .max = 6480000 },
.n = { .min = 1, .max = 1 },
.m1 = { .min = 2, .max = 2 },
@@ -337,26 +337,26 @@ int i9xx_calc_dpll_params(int refclk, struct dpll *clock)
int vlv_calc_dpll_params(int refclk, struct dpll *clock)
{
clock->m = clock->m1 * clock->m2;
- clock->p = clock->p1 * clock->p2;
+ clock->p = clock->p1 * clock->p2 * 5;
if (WARN_ON(clock->n == 0 || clock->p == 0))
return 0;
clock->vco = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(refclk * clock->m, clock->n);
clock->dot = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(clock->vco, clock->p);
- return clock->dot / 5;
+ return clock->dot;
}
int chv_calc_dpll_params(int refclk, struct dpll *clock)
{
clock->m = clock->m1 * clock->m2;
- clock->p = clock->p1 * clock->p2;
+ clock->p = clock->p1 * clock->p2 * 5;
if (WARN_ON(clock->n == 0 || clock->p == 0))
return 0;
clock->vco = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(mul_u32_u32(refclk, clock->m),
clock->n << 22);
clock->dot = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(clock->vco, clock->p);
- return clock->dot / 5;
+ return clock->dot;
}
/*
@@ -659,8 +659,6 @@ vlv_find_best_dpll(const struct intel_limit *limit,
int max_n = min(limit->n.max, refclk / 19200);
bool found = false;
- target *= 5; /* fast clock */
-
memset(best_clock, 0, sizeof(*best_clock));
/* based on hardware requirement, prefer smaller n to precision */
@@ -668,7 +666,7 @@ vlv_find_best_dpll(const struct intel_limit *limit,
for (clock.p1 = limit->p1.max; clock.p1 >= limit->p1.min; clock.p1--) {
for (clock.p2 = limit->p2.p2_fast; clock.p2 >= limit->p2.p2_slow;
clock.p2 -= clock.p2 > 10 ? 2 : 1) {
- clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2;
+ clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2 * 5;
/* based on hardware requirement, prefer bigger m1,m2 values */
for (clock.m1 = limit->m1.min; clock.m1 <= limit->m1.max; clock.m1++) {
unsigned int ppm;
@@ -729,7 +727,6 @@ chv_find_best_dpll(const struct intel_limit *limit,
*/
clock.n = 1;
clock.m1 = 2;
- target *= 5; /* fast clock */
for (clock.p1 = limit->p1.max; clock.p1 >= limit->p1.min; clock.p1--) {
for (clock.p2 = limit->p2.p2_fast;
@@ -737,7 +734,7 @@ chv_find_best_dpll(const struct intel_limit *limit,
clock.p2 -= clock.p2 > 10 ? 2 : 1) {
unsigned int error_ppm;
- clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2;
+ clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2 * 5;
m2 = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(mul_u32_u32(target, clock.p * clock.n) << 22,
refclk * clock.m1);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c
index 520a7e1942f3..efdd2f3f9d73 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ static u32 bxt_vgpu_get_dp_bitrate(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu, enum port port)
clock.p1 = (vgpu_vreg_t(vgpu, BXT_PORT_PLL_EBB_0(phy, ch)) & PORT_PLL_P1_MASK) >> PORT_PLL_P1_SHIFT;
clock.p2 = (vgpu_vreg_t(vgpu, BXT_PORT_PLL_EBB_0(phy, ch)) & PORT_PLL_P2_MASK) >> PORT_PLL_P2_SHIFT;
clock.m = clock.m1 * clock.m2;
- clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2;
+ clock.p = clock.p1 * clock.p2 * 5;
if (clock.n == 0 || clock.p == 0) {
gvt_dbg_dpy("vgpu-%d PORT_%c PLL has invalid divider\n", vgpu->id, port_name(port));
@@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ static u32 bxt_vgpu_get_dp_bitrate(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu, enum port port)
clock.vco = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(mul_u32_u32(refclk, clock.m), clock.n << 22);
clock.dot = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(clock.vco, clock.p);
- dp_br = clock.dot / 5;
+ dp_br = clock.dot;
out:
return dp_br;
--
2.38.1