From 24bd9bf54d45d28089251cdf62bf14323d1aa827 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Widawsky Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 22:38:10 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix PSR programming | has a higher precedence than ?. Therefore, the calculation doesn't do at all what you would expect. Thanks to Ken for convincing me that this was indeed the issue. Send me back to C programmer school, please. I'm sort of surprised PSR was continuing to work for people. It should be broken IMO (and it was broken for me, but I had assumed it never worked). Regression from: commit ed8546ac1f99b850879f07b1e9b06b42fb0a36d9 Author: Ben Widawsky Date: Mon Nov 4 22:45:05 2013 -0800 drm/i915/bdw: Support eDP PSR Cc: Rodrigo Vivi Cc: Kenneth Graunke Cc: Art Runyan Reported-by: "Kumar, Kiran S" Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org [v3.13+] Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c index 57552eb..41bdac4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c @@ -1639,7 +1639,7 @@ static void intel_edp_psr_enable_source(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) val |= EDP_PSR_LINK_DISABLE; I915_WRITE(EDP_PSR_CTL(dev), val | - IS_BROADWELL(dev) ? 0 : link_entry_time | + (IS_BROADWELL(dev) ? 0 : link_entry_time) | max_sleep_time << EDP_PSR_MAX_SLEEP_TIME_SHIFT | idle_frames << EDP_PSR_IDLE_FRAME_SHIFT | EDP_PSR_ENABLE); -- 2.7.4