Hi, On 27 August 2015 at 15:09, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 04:00:05PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 27-08-15 om 15:50 schreef Ville Syrjälä: >> > I don't think so. Speaking for i915, I think we've just rejected legacy page >> > flips entirely with the pipe is off on account of drm_vblank_get() failing. >> No atomic driver handles this case correctly. You can't get vblank events with the crtc off. > > I don't understand what you're saying. Should there be a comma after > "No" ? If not, then I'm not sure what they don't handle. I think you're arguing over the definition of 'correctly' perhaps? >> >> I don't see why this should be relaxed. It just complicates things and you have nothing to stick in for the vblank counter. >> > We could stick the last vbl count/timestamp in there. >> > >> > Not allowing means userspace is forced to consider the dpms state >> > whenever it wants to call the atomic ioctl. >> Userspace was the one turning off the crtc in the first place; it shouldn't continue flipping but preserve power. :-) > > Meh. Much simpler to write code when you don't have to worry about such > details. > > In the kernel it should amount to > if (!pipe_active) > send_event No, thankyou. Asking for an event, having the request succeed, and never getting an event, is a deathtrap. PAGE_FLIP_EVENT should mean that either an event gets delivered for every CRTC in crtc_state, or the request getting rejected. Nothing else. > We anyway need something like that for the crtc getting disabled case, > don't we? Yes, which I was getting at previously. We know when the CRTC gets disabled - we have to, in order to sensibly unpin etc - so that's when the event gets sent. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
