Hi Benoit, On Wednesday, 4 April 2018 16:15:11 EEST Benoit Parrot wrote: > Tomi Valkeinen wrote on Wed [2018-Apr-04 14:12:13 +0300]: > > On 26/03/18 19:21, Benoit Parrot wrote: > >> Currently available display mode from a connector are filtered out > >> based only on pixel clock capability. However we also need to filter > >> out wider mode if we cannot handle them based on available pipeline > >> capabilities. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Benoit Parrot <bparrot@xxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/omapdss.h | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_connector.c | 10 ++++++++++ > >> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c index 624dee22f46b..35541d4441df > >> 100644 > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/dss/dispc.c > >> @@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ struct dispc_features { > >> u8 mgr_height_start; > >> u16 mgr_width_max; > >> u16 mgr_height_max; > >> + u16 ovl_width_max; > >> + u16 ovl_height_max; > >> unsigned long max_lcd_pclk; > >> unsigned long max_tv_pclk; > >> unsigned int max_downscale; > >> @@ -2465,6 +2467,12 @@ static int dispc_ovl_calc_scaling(unsigned long > >> pclk, unsigned long lclk, > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> +static void dispc_ovl_get_max_size(u16 *width, u16 *height) > >> +{ > >> + *width = dispc.feat->ovl_width_max; > >> + *height = dispc.feat->ovl_height_max; > >> +} > >> + > >> static int dispc_ovl_setup_common(enum omap_plane_id plane, > >> enum omap_overlay_caps caps, u32 paddr, u32 p_uv_addr, > >> u16 screen_width, int pos_x, int pos_y, u16 width, u16 height, > >> @@ -2500,6 +2508,10 @@ static int dispc_ovl_setup_common(enum > >> omap_plane_id plane, > >> out_width = out_width == 0 ? width : out_width; > >> out_height = out_height == 0 ? height : out_height; > >> > >> + WARN(out_width > dispc.feat->ovl_width_max, > >> + "Requested OVL width (%d) is larger than can be supported > >> (%d).\n", > >> + out_width, dispc.feat->ovl_width_max); > > > > Why don't you return an error here? I don't see a need for WARN here. > > So here you mean replace the WARN with something like this: > > if (out_width > dispc.feat->ovl_width_max) { > DSSERR("Requested OVL width (%d) is larger than can be supported (%d). \n", > out_width, dispc.feat->ovl_width_max); > return -EINVAL; > } Can this happen ? If we reject invalid settings in omapdrm we should never get them here. > >> void dispc_set_ops(const struct dispc_ops *o); > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_connector.c > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_connector.c index > >> a0d7b1d905e8..d5e059abb555 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_connector.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_connector.c > >> @@ -197,6 +197,16 @@ static int omap_connector_mode_valid(struct > >> drm_connector *connector, > >> r = 0; > >> } > >> > >> + /* Check if the advertised width exceed what the pipeline can do */ > >> + if (!r) { > >> + struct omap_drm_private *priv = dev->dev_private; > >> + u16 width, height; > >> + > >> + priv->dispc_ops->ovl_get_max_size(&width, &height); > >> + if (mode->hdisplay > width) > >> + r = -EINVAL; > > > > You should check the height also. > > Yeah, I'll fix that. Unless I'm mistaken the restriction doesn't come from the output side of the display controller but from the overlays (planes), right ? Shouldn't it then be implemented in the drm_plane_helper_funcs.atomic_check operation ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel