RE: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiremath, Vaibhav
> Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 5:34 PM
> To: 'Måns Rullgård'; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-omap-
> > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Måns Rullgård
> > Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 2:09 PM
> > To: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl
> >
> > "Hiremath, Vaibhav" <hvaibhav@xxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxx]
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:01 PM
> > >> To: Hiremath, Vaibhav
> > >> Cc: Tomi Valkeinen; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:39:44PM +0530, ext Hiremath, Vaibhav
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > > From: Tomi Valkeinen [mailto:tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxx]
> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 2:28 PM
> > >> > > To: Hiremath, Vaibhav
> > >> > > Cc: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> > > Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 23:46 +0530, ext Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote:
> > >> > > > Hi,
> > > <snip>
> > >> >
<snip..>
> 
> > > As far as WAITFORGO is concerned, I think GO bit concept is
> > > something OMAP notion/term and doesn't make sense to standardize
> > > it. Atleast I am not aware of any other architecture having GO bit.
> >
> > Naming is minor detail.  Feel free to suggest a better one.
> >
> [Hiremath, Vaibhav] If I fail to convince on this, then I think the only
> left option is to make WAITFORGO ioctl generic. And put a disclaimer on
> WAITFORVSYNC, it must not be used in panning use-case.
> 
> 
[Hiremath, Vaibhav] Also let me bring another point here,

If I understand correctly most of the application libraries (DirectFB, X, etc..) does use FBIO_WAITFORVSYNC to synchronize with HW, and manage ping pong mechanism.

With this finding, in case of OMAP3 we have to use OMAPFB_WAITFORGO (breaking standard applications).

Thanks,
Vaibhav

> > --
> > Måns Rullgård
> > mans@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Tourism]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux