On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 08:44:45PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>> Baytrail cannot easily detect screen updates and force PSR exit.
>> So we inactivate it on {busy_ioctl, set_domain, sw_finish and mark_busy}
>> and update to enable it back it later with a delayed workqueue.
>
> Why are we not checking if the object being accessed is indeed being
> used for PSR? In set-domain, you only care about writes.
Are y
> sw-finish and
> busy are too late for psr_exit, the damage has already been done and
> presumably the content may already be corrupted? Can you please explain
> that it is safe to do an psr_exit after the damage is already in the scanount
> based on the panel refresh cycle.
> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
--
Rodrigo Vivi
Blog: http://blog.vivi.eng.br
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
