On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 03:59:22PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote: > 2017-08-30 Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>: > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 02:17:52PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > > > By always keeping track of the last commit in plane_state, we know > > > whether there is an active update on the plane or not. With that > > > information we can reject the fast update, and force the slowpath > > > to be used as was originally intended. > > > > > > Cc: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Makes sense, but I think like patch 1 it would be better to do this in a > > separate series. Which would then include a patch to move i915 over to the > > async plane support. > > This patch makes sense to me and it is better than the fix I wrote but never > got around to send it out. I can pick in here locally, put the patches I > have here for the drivers on top of it and send to intel-gfx for CI. > > Anyway, without the i915 change, this is > > Reviewed-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> I can supply the r-b for the i915 hunk :-) Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
