| Message ID | 1376657827-8105-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Friday 16 August 2013 14:57:07 Pali Rohár wrote: > In commit 77145f1cbdf8d28b46ff8070ca749bad821e0774 was > introduced error which cause that reclocking on nv40 not > working anymore. There is missing assigment of return value > from pll_calc to ret. > > Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Martin Peres <martin.peres@labri.fr> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c index 3af5bcd..625f80d > 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ nv40_calc_pll(struct drm_device *dev, u32 > reg, struct nvbios_pll *pll, if (clk < pll->vco1.max_freq) > pll->vco2.max_freq = 0; > > - pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); > + ret = pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); > if (ret == 0) > return -ERANGE; Hello, it is possible to include this patch in 3.11? Or it is too late now and need to wait for 3.12?
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday 16 August 2013 14:57:07 Pali Rohár wrote: >> In commit 77145f1cbdf8d28b46ff8070ca749bad821e0774 was >> introduced error which cause that reclocking on nv40 not >> working anymore. There is missing assigment of return value >> from pll_calc to ret. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Peres <martin.peres@labri.fr> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c index 3af5bcd..625f80d >> 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ nv40_calc_pll(struct drm_device *dev, u32 >> reg, struct nvbios_pll *pll, if (clk < pll->vco1.max_freq) >> pll->vco2.max_freq = 0; >> >> - pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); >> + ret = pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); >> if (ret == 0) >> return -ERANGE; > > Hello, it is possible to include this patch in 3.11? > Or it is too late now and need to wait for 3.12? I've picked up the patch and will submit it in my next 3.11-fixes pull request. Thanks, Ben. > > -- > Pali Rohár > pali.rohar@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel >
On Wednesday 21 August 2013 02:24:01 Ben Skeggs wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Friday 16 August 2013 14:57:07 Pali Rohár wrote: > >> In commit 77145f1cbdf8d28b46ff8070ca749bad821e0774 was > >> introduced error which cause that reclocking on nv40 not > >> working anymore. There is missing assigment of return value > >> from pll_calc to ret. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Martin Peres <martin.peres@labri.fr> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c index 3af5bcd..625f80d > >> 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c > >> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ nv40_calc_pll(struct drm_device *dev, > >> u32 reg, struct nvbios_pll *pll, if (clk < > >> pll->vco1.max_freq) > >> > >> pll->vco2.max_freq = 0; > >> > >> - pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); > >> + ret = pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); > >> > >> if (ret == 0) > >> > >> return -ERANGE; > > > > Hello, it is possible to include this patch in 3.11? > > Or it is too late now and need to wait for 3.12? > > I've picked up the patch and will submit it in my next > 3.11-fixes pull request. > > Thanks, > Ben. > Hello, now I see that patch is in 3.11, thanks! Ben, what do you think, can be this patch backported to older kernels?
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 21 August 2013 02:24:01 Ben Skeggs wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Pali Rohár > <pali.rohar@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Friday 16 August 2013 14:57:07 Pali Rohár wrote: >> >> In commit 77145f1cbdf8d28b46ff8070ca749bad821e0774 was >> >> introduced error which cause that reclocking on nv40 not >> >> working anymore. There is missing assigment of return value >> >> from pll_calc to ret. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com> >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Peres <martin.peres@labri.fr> >> >> --- >> >> >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c | 2 +- >> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c index 3af5bcd..625f80d >> >> 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c >> >> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ nv40_calc_pll(struct drm_device *dev, >> >> u32 reg, struct nvbios_pll *pll, if (clk < >> >> pll->vco1.max_freq) >> >> >> >> pll->vco2.max_freq = 0; >> >> >> >> - pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); >> >> + ret = pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); >> >> >> >> if (ret == 0) >> >> >> >> return -ERANGE; >> > >> > Hello, it is possible to include this patch in 3.11? >> > Or it is too late now and need to wait for 3.12? >> >> I've picked up the patch and will submit it in my next >> 3.11-fixes pull request. >> >> Thanks, >> Ben. >> > > Hello, now I see that patch is in 3.11, thanks! Ben, what do you > think, can be this patch backported to older kernels? Personally, I don't care at all. The current PM code is a dead end, and completely not "supported" (hence why it's hidden behind a magic parameter). If I had my way it'd have been completely ripped out already. If someone wants to backport and test it on earlier kernels though, by all means, go ahead :) Thanks, Ben. > > -- > Pali Rohár > pali.rohar@gmail.com
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c index 3af5bcd..625f80d 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv40_pm.c @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ nv40_calc_pll(struct drm_device *dev, u32 reg, struct nvbios_pll *pll, if (clk < pll->vco1.max_freq) pll->vco2.max_freq = 0; - pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); + ret = pclk->pll_calc(pclk, pll, clk, &coef); if (ret == 0) return -ERANGE;