On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 04:08:25PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 14/10/15 15:51, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >The rotated view depends upon the rotation paramters, but thus far we
> >didn't bother checking for those. This seems to have been an issue
> >ever since this was introduce in
> >
> >commit fe14d5f4e5468c5b80a24f1a64abcbe116143670
> >Author: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
> >Date: Wed Dec 10 17:27:58 2014 +0000
> >
> > drm/i915: Infrastructure for supporting different GGTT views per object
> >
> >But userspace is allowed to reuse framebuffer backing storage with
> >different framebuffers with different pixel formats/stride/whatever.
> >And e.g. SNA indeed does this. Hence we must check for all the
> >paramters to match, not just that it's rotated.
> >
> >v2: intel_plane_obj_offset also needs to construct the full view, to
> >avoid fallout since they don't fully match.
> >
> >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 10 +++++-----
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> >index 2e1f6493c9e7..8a36f4fcc676 100644
> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> >@@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ i915_ggtt_view_equal(const struct i915_ggtt_view *a,
> >
> > if (a->type != b->type)
> > return false;
> >- if (a->type == I915_GGTT_VIEW_PARTIAL)
> >+ if (a->type != I915_GGTT_VIEW_NORMAL)
> > return !memcmp(&a->params, &b->params, sizeof(a->params));
> > return true;
> > }
> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >index 57459fedf216..2a5987ce576c 100644
> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >@@ -2894,16 +2894,16 @@ unsigned long intel_plane_obj_offset(struct intel_plane *intel_plane,
> > struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> > unsigned int plane)
> > {
> >- const struct i915_ggtt_view *view = &i915_ggtt_view_normal;
> >+ struct i915_ggtt_view view;
> > struct i915_vma *vma;
> > unsigned char *offset;
> >
> >- if (intel_rotation_90_or_270(intel_plane->base.state->rotation))
> >- view = &i915_ggtt_view_rotated;
> >+ intel_fill_fb_ggtt_view(&view, intel_plane->base.fb,
> >+ intel_plane->base.state);
> >
> >- vma = i915_gem_obj_to_ggtt_view(obj, view);
> >+ vma = i915_gem_obj_to_ggtt_view(obj, &view);
> > if (WARN(!vma, "ggtt vma for display object not found! (view=%u)\n",
> >- view->type))
> >+ view.type))
> > return -1;
> >
> > offset = (unsigned char *)vma->node.start;
> >
>
> As we discussed on IRC I had wrong assumptions when developing this.
> Luckily SNA is not using hardware 90/270 yet so we are safe there.
> And Android probably doesn't reuse the fb obj or it would have been
> reported. But I'll check.
>
> So thanks for the cleanup! For all three:
>
> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Just a shame this means so much more computation in
> intel_plane_obj_offset, really highlights that vma should be stored
> in the state, if it is possible.
On your todo list is reviewing the patches that eliminate
intel_plane_obj_offset.
:-p
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
