On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 07:59:15PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:10:40AM -0700, Matt Roper wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:15:25PM +0200, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > In preparation to movable/resizable primary planes pass the clipped > > > plane size to .update_primary_plane(). > > > > Personally I feel like it would make more sense to just completely kill > > off .update_primary_plane() now rather than trying to evolve it. We > > already have an intel_plane->update_plane() function pointer which is > > never set or called for non-sprites at the moment. We could unify the > > handling of low-level plane programming by just using that function > > pointer for primary planes as well. > > I want to kill it off as well, but that means either killing off > set_base_atomic() or making it use the plane commit hook. I suppose we > could hand craft a suitable plane state for it and just commit that > without any checks or anything? set_base_atomic is bonghits imo, I think we should just replace it with the set_base helper for the transitional helpers. set_base_atomic can't grab locks and assumes that the buffer is pinned already. Hm, so maybe a special version of the plane helper which forgoes the prepare/celanup_fb? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
