On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 09:48:09AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Hi Javier,
> >
> > another idea about this patch: why not just keep the allocation in the
> > plane's atomic check, but store the temporary buffers in a plane struct.
> > You'd only grow the arrays length in atomic_check and later fetch the
> > pointers in atomic_update. It needs some locking, but nothing complicated.
> >
>
> Yes, that would work too. Another option is to just move the buffers to
> struct ssd130x_device as it was before commit 45b58669e532 ("drm/ssd130x:
> Allocate buffer in the plane's .atomic_check() callback") but just make
> them fixed arrays with the size of the biggest format.
>
> That will be some memory wasted but will prevent the problem of trying to
> allocate buffers after drm_atomic_helper_swap_state() has been called.
If we want to go that road, we don't even need an extra allocation, it
can be part of the state or object structure itself.
Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
