Sinclair Yeh wrote:
Hi Woody,
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 04:05:50PM -0500, Woody Suwalski wrote:
The 4.15 vmwgfx driver shows a warning during boot (32 bit x86)
It is caused by a mismatch between the result of vmw_enable_vblank() and
what the drm_atomic_helper expects:
/...
ret = drm_crtc_vblank_get(crtc);
WARN_ONCE(ret != -EINVAL, "driver forgot to call
drm_crtc_vblank_off()\n");
This doesn't apply to us because we don't have vblank support, and so
-ENOSYS seems to be the right error.
In the commit message for 84014b0a39ee, it does state a check for this
condition, but the check itself is based on dev->irq_enabled.
Is there another way to check for vblank support?
/...
Signed-off by: Woody Suwalski <terraluna977@xxxxxxxxx>
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c 2017-11-22 15:29:46.511674079
-0500
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c 2017-11-22 15:30:35.344559592
-0500
@@ -1869,7 +1869,7 @@ u32 vmw_get_vblank_counter(struct drm_de
*/
int vmw_enable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe)
{
- return -ENOSYS;
+ return -EINVAL;
}
/**
Sinclair, it is a valid stand, so I guess it is time to ask Daniel...
Would it be OK to convert the WARN_ONCE statement in drm_atomic_helper
to recognize ENOSYS as a valid error? Something like
WARN_ONCE((ret != -EINVAL && ret != _ENOSYS), "driver forgot to call
drm_crtc_vblank_off()\n");
Thanks, Woody
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
