On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 03:13:43PM -0700, Stéphane Marchesin wrote:
> This is a very crude page_flip implementation for UDL. There are ways
> to make it better (make it asynchronous, make it do actual vsynced
> flips...) but that's for another patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stéphane Marchesin <marcheu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/udl/udl_modeset.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/udl/udl_modeset.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/udl/udl_modeset.c
> index cddc4fc..7dc3bd8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/udl/udl_modeset.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/udl/udl_modeset.c
> @@ -363,6 +363,26 @@ static void udl_crtc_destroy(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> kfree(crtc);
> }
>
> +static int udl_crtc_page_flip(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
> + struct drm_framebuffer *fb,
> + struct drm_pending_vblank_event *event,
> + uint32_t page_flip_flags)
> +{
> + struct udl_framebuffer *ufb = to_udl_fb(fb);
> + struct drm_device *dev = crtc->dev;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + udl_handle_damage(ufb, 0, 0, fb->width, fb->height);
Could we not save the damage from an earlier dirtyfb and limit the data
we have to send here?
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
