On 2019-01-10 6:56 p.m., Przemek Socha wrote: > > [ 147.846148] [drm:amdgpu_display_user_framebuffer_create [amdgpu]] Invalid > pitch: expecting 10752 but got 10624 > [ 147.846155] [drm:drm_internal_framebuffer_create] could not create > framebuffer" Thanks, this confirms that the check is too strict. I've sent a patch reverting this as well. Yu, I like the idea behind your changes, but unfortunately it's more complicated than that. If you want to work on similar checks which accurately reflect the hardware constraints, people on the amd-gfx list should be able to help with that. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
index 70a816dd8b4d..99b646c16311 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
@@ -537,8 +537,11 @@ amdgpu_display_user_framebuffer_create(struct drm_device *dev,
pitch = amdgpu_align_pitch(adev, pitch, cpp, false);
if (mode_cmd->pitches[0] != pitch) {
- DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Invalid pitch: expecting %d but got %d\n",
- pitch, mode_cmd->pitches[0]);
+ struct drm_format_name_buf format_name;
+
+ DRM_ERROR("Invalid pitch: expecting %d but got %d, format %s => cpp=%d\n",
+ pitch, mode_cmd->pitches[0],
+ drm_get_format_name(mode_cmd->pixel_format, &format_name), cpp);
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
}
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
