On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 08:08:14PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Ville,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 08:04:20PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Revert back to comparing fb->format->format instead fb->format for the
> > page flip ioctl. This check was originally only here to disallow pixel
> > format changes, but when we changed it to do the pointer comparison
> > we potentially started to reject some (but definitely not all) modifier
> > changes as well. In fact the current behaviour depends on whether the
> > driver overrides the format info for a specific format+modifier combo.
> > Eg. on i915 this now rejects compression vs. no compression changes but
> > does not reject any other tiling changes. That's just inconsistent
> > nonsense.
> >
> > The main reason we have to go back to the old behaviour is to fix page
> > flipping with Xorg. At some point Xorg got its atomic rights taken away
> > and since then we can't page flip between compressed and non-compressed
> > fbs on i915. Currently we get no page flipping for any games pretty much
> > since Mesa likes to use compressed buffers. Not sure how compositors are
> > working around this (don't use one myself). I guess they must be doing
> > something to get non-compressed buffers instead. Either that or
> > somehow no one noticed the tearing from the blit fallback.
> >
> > Looking back at the original discussion on this change we pretty much
> > just did it in the name of skipping a few extra pointer dereferences.
> > However, I've decided not to revert the whole thing in case someone
> > has since started to depend on these changes. None of the other checks
> > are relevant for i915 anyways.
>
> Do display controller usually support changing modifiers for page flips
> ? I understand from the information about that i915 does, but is that
> usual ? Could there be drivers that really on this check to reject
> modifier changes, and that aren't prepared to handle them if they are
> not rejected by the core ? I'm not opposed to this change, but I'd like
> to carefully consider the fallout.
After a bit of grepping I can't actually see any other driver providing
a .get_format_info() hook. So looks like there is no change in behaviour
for any other driver. Based on that we could even do a full revert, but
meh.
>
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: dbd4d5761e1f ("drm: Replace 'format->format' comparisons to just 'format' comparisons")
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c
> > index d6ad60ab0d38..f2ca5315f23b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c
> > @@ -1153,7 +1153,7 @@ int drm_mode_page_flip_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > if (ret)
> > goto out;
> >
> > - if (old_fb->format != fb->format) {
> > + if (old_fb->format->format != fb->format->format) {
> > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Page flip is not allowed to change frame buffer format.\n");
> > ret = -EINVAL;
> > goto out;
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
