Op 09-10-2019 om 14:41 schreef Ville Syrjälä: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:31:58PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 09-10-2019 om 14:23 schreef Ville Syrjälä: >>> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 02:13:55PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >>>> Op 08-10-2019 om 19:42 schreef Ville Syrjälä: >>>>> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 01:35:02PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >>>>>> Splitting plane state is easier than splitting crtc_state, >>>>>> before plane check we copy the drm properties to hw so we can >>>>>> do the same in bigjoiner later on. >>>>>> >>>>>> We copy the state after we did all the modeset handling, but fortunately >>>>>> i915 seems to be split correctly and nothing during modeset looks >>>>>> at plane_state. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++- >>>>>> .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.h | 2 + >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 1 + >>>>>> .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h | 22 +++++++++-- >>>>>> 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c >>>>>> index 01937896d69c..cc154cfa3381 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c >>>>>> @@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ intel_plane_duplicate_state(struct drm_plane *plane) >>>>>> intel_state->vma = NULL; >>>>>> intel_state->flags = 0; >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* will be set in intel_plane_atomic_check_with_state() */ >>>>>> + memset(&intel_state->hw, 0, sizeof(intel_state->hw)); >>>>> That seems wrong for the case where we add the plane after the >>>>> plane check has already been done. >>>>> >>>>> I think we should maintain the current state unless the plane check >>>>> will overwrite it. >>>> Have you seen >>>> >>>> intel_atomic_get_plane_state_after_check()? >>> Yes, but I don't like it. >> This is however required because of the split. We should not look at the old plane_state contents before atomic_check and to prevent that I think it's better to zero out plane_state->hw, >> >> in which case bugs are at least consistent. :) > I don't like leaking this special case all over. IMO it's not really any > different to the current rule that you can't look at any of the derived > state before plane check(). We're just extending the concept of the > derived state a bit. > I'm ok with that.. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
