On 04/22/2016 08:53 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 01:31:48PM -0400, Robert Foss wrote:
On 04/21/2016 10:50 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:59:45AM -0400, robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Avoid overwriting planes with statically asigned indices
with planes that have dynamically assigned indices.
Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/igt_kms.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.c b/lib/igt_kms.c
index 07fb73b..3f953ec 100644
--- a/lib/igt_kms.c
+++ b/lib/igt_kms.c
@@ -1326,6 +1326,8 @@ void igt_display_init(igt_display_t *display, int drm_fd)
display->has_universal_planes = 1;
break;
default:
+ while (p == IGT_PLANE_PRIMARY || p == IGT_PLANE_CURSOR)
+ p++;
What we might need to do is to actually make primary and cursor
dynamically assigned. Since with most drivers that's the case that
happens. Otoh we have a variable number of planes on i915 too, so not
entirely sure now what's going on here ...
-Daniel
Since PRIMARY and CURSOR planes are statically assigned and
that the other cases in this switch statement used the static
assignments, the loop simply makes sure the we don't overwrite
the PRIMARY or CURSOR plane.
Well primary should be first, cursor last ... Are there drivers which
register planes in a funny order that we need this? If so a comment would
be good I think.
-Daniel
I wasn't aware of the cursor plane always being last one.
I'll have the v2 patches reflect this.
plane = &pipe->planes[p];
plane->index = p++;
break;
--
2.5.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
