|
On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso
wrote:
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending". v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and don't add a superfluous wait on the workqueue. Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c index 3b8f652698f8..285f8cd5afe1 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c @@ -282,6 +282,9 @@ int rockchip_drm_atomic_commit(struct drm_device *dev, struct rockchip_atomic_commit *commit = &private->commit; int ret; + if (async && work_busy(&commit->work)) + return -EBUSY; + Sorry for reply late. There is a comment on work_busy function describe : "the test result is unreliable and only useful as advisory hints or for debugging." I don't know if it's suitable to use it here, does some guys know it? And then, the "flush_work(&commit->work);" is no needed if return -EBUSY here. you can remove it at this patch. ret = drm_atomic_helper_prepare_planes(dev, state); if (ret) return ret; -- Ｍark Yao |
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
