search for: crtc17

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "crtc17".

Did you mean: crtc1a
2009 Jun 10
0
[PATCH] Use nanosleep instead of usleep when waiting the hardware.
...src/nv_crtc.c index b8524fb..1ffb267 100644 --- a/src/nv_crtc.c +++ b/src/nv_crtc.c @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ nv_crtc_dpms(xf86CrtcPtr crtc, int mode) seq1 |= (NVReadVgaSeq(pNv, nv_crtc->head, NV_VIO_SR_CLOCK_INDEX) & ~0x20); NVWriteVgaSeq(pNv, nv_crtc->head, NV_VIO_SR_CLOCK_INDEX, seq1); crtc17 |= (NVReadVgaCrtc(pNv, nv_crtc->head, NV_CIO_CR_MODE_INDEX) & ~0x80); - usleep(10000); + nouveau_usleep(10000); NVWriteVgaCrtc(pNv, nv_crtc->head, NV_CIO_CR_MODE_INDEX, crtc17); NVVgaSeqReset(pNv, nv_crtc->head, false); diff --git a/src/nv_include.h b/src/nv_include.h index 0409c...
2009 Dec 13
3
[PATCH] drm/nouveau: use drm debug levels
...vpll: n %d m %d log2p %d\n", + NV_DEBUG_KMS(dev, "vpll: n %d m %d log2p %d\n", pv->N1, pv->M1, pv->log2P); nv_crtc->cursor.set_offset(nv_crtc, nv_crtc->cursor.offset); @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ nv_crtc_dpms(struct drm_crtc *crtc, int mode) unsigned char seq1 = 0, crtc17 = 0; unsigned char crtc1A; - NV_TRACE(dev, "Setting dpms mode %d on CRTC %d\n", mode, + NV_DEBUG_KMS(dev, "Setting dpms mode %d on CRTC %d\n", mode, nv_crtc->index); if (nv_crtc->last_dpms == mode) /* Don't do unnecesary mode changes. */ @@ -603,7 +603,...
2023 Jul 12
8
[PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev
Hello, while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to "drm_dev". I have no strong preference here though, so "drmdev" or "drm" are fine for me,
2023 Jul 12
8
[PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev
Hello, while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to "drm_dev". I have no strong preference here though, so "drmdev" or "drm" are fine for me,