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