Am 16.08.23 um 15:41 schrieb Hamza Mahfooz:
On 8/16/23 01:55, Christian König wrote:
Am 15.08.23 um 19:26 schrieb Hamza Mahfooz:
fbcon requires that we implement &drm_framebuffer_funcs.dirty.
Otherwise, the framebuffer might take a while to flush (which would
manifest as noticeable lag). However, we can't enable this callback for
non-fbcon cases since it might cause too many atomic commits to be made
at once. So, implement amdgpu_dirtyfb() and only enable it for fbcon
framebuffers on devices that support atomic KMS.
Cc: Aurabindo Pillai <aurabindo.pillai@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.1+
Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2519
Signed-off-by: Hamza Mahfooz <hamza.mahfooz@xxxxxxx>
---
v2: update variable names
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c | 26
++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
index d20dd3f852fc..d3b59f99cb7c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c
@@ -38,6 +38,8 @@
#include <linux/pci.h>
#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
#include <drm/drm_crtc_helper.h>
+#include <drm/drm_damage_helper.h>
+#include <drm/drm_drv.h>
#include <drm/drm_edid.h>
#include <drm/drm_fb_helper.h>
#include <drm/drm_gem_framebuffer_helper.h>
@@ -532,11 +534,29 @@ bool amdgpu_display_ddc_probe(struct
amdgpu_connector *amdgpu_connector,
return true;
}
+static int amdgpu_dirtyfb(struct drm_framebuffer *fb, struct
drm_file *file,
+ unsigned int flags, unsigned int color,
+ struct drm_clip_rect *clips, unsigned int num_clips)
+{
+
+ if (strcmp(fb->comm, "[fbcon]"))
+ return -ENOSYS;
Once more to the v2 of this patch: Tests like those are a pretty big
NO-GO for upstreaming.
On closer inspection it is actually sufficient to check if `file` is
NULL here (since it means that the request isn't from userspace). So, do
you think that would be palatable for upstream?
That's certainly better than doing a string compare, but I'm not sure if
that's sufficient.
In general drivers shouldn't have any special handling for fdcon.
You should probably have Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> take a
look at this.
Regards,
Christian.
Regards,
Christian.
+
+ return drm_atomic_helper_dirtyfb(fb, file, flags, color, clips,
+ num_clips);
+}
+
static const struct drm_framebuffer_funcs amdgpu_fb_funcs = {
.destroy = drm_gem_fb_destroy,
.create_handle = drm_gem_fb_create_handle,
};
+static const struct drm_framebuffer_funcs amdgpu_fb_funcs_atomic = {
+ .destroy = drm_gem_fb_destroy,
+ .create_handle = drm_gem_fb_create_handle,
+ .dirty = amdgpu_dirtyfb
+};
+
uint32_t amdgpu_display_supported_domains(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
uint64_t bo_flags)
{
@@ -1139,7 +1159,11 @@ static int
amdgpu_display_gem_fb_verify_and_init(struct drm_device *dev,
if (ret)
goto err;
- ret = drm_framebuffer_init(dev, &rfb->base, &amdgpu_fb_funcs);
+ if (drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset(dev))
+ ret = drm_framebuffer_init(dev, &rfb->base,
+ &amdgpu_fb_funcs_atomic);
+ else
+ ret = drm_framebuffer_init(dev, &rfb->base, &amdgpu_fb_funcs);
if (ret)
goto err;
