Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "r_0x137390".
2017 Apr 10
0
[PATCH 02/11] nvkm/ramgf100: Calculate timings
.../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c
index fffd01a..6ebdc4c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c
@@ -48,11 +48,7 @@ struct gf100_ramfuc {
struct ramfuc_reg r_0x137390;
- struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f290;
- struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f294;
- struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f298;
- struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f29c;
- struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f2a0;
+ struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f290[5];
struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f300;
struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f338;
@@ -104,6 +100,50 @@ struct gf100_r...
2017 Apr 10
11
Preparations for Fermi DRAM clock changes
No, no, these will not implement Fermi reclocking. This set of patches
contains some of the preparatory work that I deem stable enough to
move upstream. Notable changes
- Training pattern upload routines from GK104+ now shared with GT215+
- Timing calculation for Fermi
- GDDR5 MR calculation from VBIOS timing table v1.0. Also useful for that
pesky GT 240.
- A routine to translate a VBIOS init
2017 Apr 10
14
RESEND Preparations for Fermi DRAM clock changes
Two patches went missing as a result of PEBCAK. No v2 marks as nothing
changed really. Just resending for easier enforcement of patch order
in other people's trees. Sorry for the noise.
Original message:
No, no, these will not implement Fermi reclocking. This set of patches
contains some of the preparatory work that I deem stable enough to
move upstream. Notable changes
- Training pattern