On 01/31/2015 02:17 AM, Gustavo Padovan wrote: > 2015-01-30 Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>: > >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 03:57:53PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 30 January 2015 at 14:30, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 2015-01-30 Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >>>>> We will lose unfinished prior events by this change. That's why we use >>>>> linked list. >>>> >>>> I think you are right, but I was using exynos_crtc->event to do exactly the >>>> same as exynos_crtc->pending_flip. So we were losing a event in >>>> exynos_drm_crtc_dpms() before too. I change this patch to have a page_flip >>>> list on the crtc. >>> >>> The usual approach in other drivers is to return -EBUSY when there is >>> already an async pageflip pending. This definitely makes sense to me, >>> as I don't see the point of submitting pageflips faster than the >>> hardware can actually render, and pretending to the application that >>> they were actually shown. >> >> Yes, right now drm doesn't really support anything like a pageflip queue. >> Same for atomic really. Even the async pageflip mode works like it, it >> just ends up flipping faster. >> >> Long-term we want a flip queue where subsequent flips can be folded >> together on the next vblank. That makes benchmark-mode games happy, >> without resulting in tearing like async flips and still resulting in the >> lowest possible latency (since the kernel we just commit the flips for >> which all the buffers are ready and not stall). > > Yeah, that makes sense. I'll just add a check for -EBUSY and send a v2. > Then it's reasonable to me. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |