On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 09:27:20AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 07:21:34PM +0300, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > If we couldn't get a high precisions vblank timestamp, we currently > > store a zeroed timestamp instead and assume the next vblank irq to > > get us something better. This makes sense when trying to update the > > timestamp from eg. vblank enable. But if we do this from the vblank > > irq we will never get a vblank timestamp unless we high precision > > timestamps are available and succeeded. This break weston for instance > > on drivers lacking high precision timestamps. > > > > To fix this, zero the timestamp only when not called from vbl irq. > > When called from the irq, we still want the timestamp, even if not > > perfect. > > > > This fixes a regression from > > 4dfd64862ff852df drm: Use vblank timestamps to guesstimate how many vblanks were missed > > > > Cc: Mario Kleiner <mario.kleiner.de@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reported-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 7 ++++--- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > Applied on top of next-20151001 and the weston problem I was seeing is > gone, so: > > Tested-by: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I think it might be worth considering squashing this into the offending > commit to avoid breaking bisectibility. Can't squash any more since history is frozen in drm-next. Applied to drm-misc, thanks. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
