On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 05:06:38PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 04:24:06PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:32:22PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > [...] > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > > [...] > > > + ret = wait_event_timeout(dev->vblank[crtc].queue, > > > + C, msecs_to_jiffies(100)); > > > > 100 milliseconds looks like a very arbitrary choice. Theoretically we > > support things like crtc->mode.vrefresh = 5, so I wonder if we should > > parameterize this on the refresh rate, or simply increase it further? > > Once we have 10Hz panels I think we can pump/fix this. In i915 we've used > 50ms everywhere, and never hit this. Except when driver bugs, ofc. Okay, fair enough. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpjoQ6cKzX1f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
