On Thu, 7 May 2015 15:18:27 +0100
Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 04:41:48PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 May 2015, Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 12:12:18PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > [cc'ing the authors]
> > >>
> > >> This has been posted earlier [1] and it has review to be
> > >> addressed [2].
> > >>
> > >> BR,
> > >> Jani.
> > >
> > > I agree with Ander's response in [2]...we can't call
> > > intel_update_watermarks() in the commit function because we're
> > > under vblank evasion. We should already be flagging the
> > > transaction as needing a watermark update in
> > > intel_check_cursor_plane(), and that flag will be acted upon
> > > immediately after the commit functions are done running, once
> > > we've re-enabled interrupts.
> > >
> > > Note that our current codebase looks a bit different since we've
> > > dropped intel_crtc->cursor_{width,height}. So the relevant check
> > > in intel_check_cursor_plane() now looks like:
> > >
> > > if (plane->state->crtc_w != state->base.crtc_w)
> > > intel_crtc->atomic.update_wm = true;
> > >
> > > Is there a bugzilla open on this issue with more details?
> >
> > Not that I know of. Ismael?
> >
>
> Probably:
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=88944
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1199890
> are related.
> -Chris
>
I am experiencing neither of those things.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
