On Thu, 5 Feb 2015 10:56:30 +0100 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2015 10:34:20 +0100 > Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 08:58:40PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > Hi Ville, > > > > > > On Wed, 4 Feb 2015 20:02:27 +0200 > > > Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 06:23:15PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > I'm currently adding support for atomic operations (or atomic > > > > > modesetting) in the Atmel HLCDC driver. > > > > > Everything is pretty much in place, and all the features provided by the > > > > > current driver are working as expected. > > > > > However, there's one feature I'd like to add (actually I was hoping > > > > > atomic support could help me deal with this feature), and I not sure > > > > > how to do it. > > > > > > > > > > The HLCDC IP provides a way to discard a specific area on the primary > > > > > plane (in case at least one of the overlay is activated and alpha > > > > > blending is disabled). > > > > > Doing this will reduce the amount of data to transfer from the main > > > > > memory to the Display Controller, and thus alleviate the load on the > > > > > memory bus (since this link is quite limited on such hardware, > > > > > this kind of optimization is really important). > > > > > > > > > > My problem here is that there is no way, in the current atomic > > > > > implementation, to internally ask for a plane state modification. > > > > > > > > > > Is there a plan to add such hooks that would be called after the > > > > > requested state modifications (i.e. operations done before the > > > > > drm_atomic_commit call in all helper functions), but before the atomic > > > > > checks begin (i.e. call to drm_atomic_check_only) ? > > > > > Such hooks would let me ask for a primary plane update (modifying the > > > > > discard area property) if needed. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe I'm totally mistaken in my approach to solve this problem, so > > > > > please let me know if you see other solutions. > > > > > > > > So this looks pretty much exactly like the overlay optimization feature > > > > in OMAPs. I don't really see why you need to treat is as some kind of > > > > plane property. It's just an internal implementation detail so can't you > > > > just compute the discard area at commit() time based on what planes are > > > > going to be active? Or if you want to take it into account in some > > > > bandwidth calculation you can compute it already at check() time. > > > > > > > > > > Okay, I'll have a look at the OMAP driver, but I'd really like to > > > apply the discard area setting as part of the primary plane > > > atomic_update function (the discard area registers are part of the > > > primary plane registers, and plane settings are updated by setting a > > > specific bit to 1). > > > > > > I tried to update the primary plane discard settings as part of the > > > atomic_update, but when nothing touches the primary plane (an > > > update_plane on one of the overlay planes), the primary plane is kept > > > unchanged, and thus the new primary settings are never applied. > > > > So I'm not sure whether I understand this correctly, so let me just invent > > some fake hw model and explain with that ;-) Please adjust in your reply. > > > > Assumption: We have 1 crtc and 2 planes, a primary and an overlay on top. > > Our fancy hw has an optional rect within the primary plane which we can > > tell it not to scan out. The idea is that that rect perfectly matches the > > placement of the 2nd overlay plane. > > > > Step 1: We need to store this state somewhere of this special rect. So > > let's create a derived plane state for the primary plane. > > > > struct fhw_primary_plane_state { > > struct drm_plane_state base; > > > > bool enable_punchout; > > int punchout_x/_y/_h/_w; > > }; > > > > tegra is a nice example of what you all need to do when your driver needs > > derived state objects. > > Yep, already created my own state when adding support for atomic > mode-setting (see [1]), and that's exactly what I was planning to do > (add disc_x/y/w/h fields in my plane state) ;-). [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/4/658 -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel