On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 09:04:35PM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> If the damage handling fails, restore the damage area. The next invocation
> of the damage worker will then perform the update.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> index 2e1a335bafd2..13b65dad2ca8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> @@ -431,11 +431,28 @@ static void drm_fb_helper_damage_work(struct work_struct *work)
> if (helper->buffer) {
> ret = drm_fb_helper_damage_blit(helper, &clip_copy);
> if (ret)
> - return;
> + goto err;
> }
>
> - if (helper->fb->funcs->dirty)
> - helper->fb->funcs->dirty(helper->fb, NULL, 0, 0, &clip_copy, 1);
> + if (helper->fb->funcs->dirty) {
> + ret = helper->fb->funcs->dirty(helper->fb, NULL, 0, 0, &clip_copy, 1);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err;
I think this is unexpected enough that we should put some drm error
printing here I think.
-Daniel
> + }
> +
> + return;
> +
> +err:
> + /*
> + * Restore damage clip rectangle on errors. Next instance of damage
> + * worker will perform the update.
> + */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&helper->damage_lock, flags);
> + clip->x1 = min_t(u32, clip->x1, clip_copy.x1);
> + clip->y1 = min_t(u32, clip->y1, clip_copy.y1);
> + clip->x2 = max_t(u32, clip->x2, clip_copy.x2);
> + clip->y2 = max_t(u32, clip->y2, clip_copy.y2);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&helper->damage_lock, flags);
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.29.2
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
