Em Qui, 2016-01-21 às 14:04 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu: > Op 19-01-16 om 14:35 schreef Paulo Zanoni: > > We unconditionally disable/update FBC even during the page flip > > IOCTLs, and an unconditional disable/update at every atomic commit > > touching the primary plane shouldn't impact PC state residency > > noticeably. Besides, the code that checks for rotation is a good > > hint > > that we may be forgetting something else, so let's leave all the > > decisions to intel_fbc.c, making the code much safer. > > > > Once we have the code to properly make FBC enable/update decisions > > based on atomic states, with proper locking, then we'll be able to > > evaluate whether it will be worth trying to optimize the cases > > where a > > disable isn't needed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > I would rather have this patch remove those 2 members entirely, but I > can work with this for now. And what would be the new way to know whether a given atomic commit touches the primary plane of a given crtc? > > Could nuke at least disable_fbc though, being redundant with > update_fbc. :) Check patch 11 :) > > ~Maarten _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
