On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:15:51AM +0300, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Ville Syrj?l? <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> > > If the user is interested in getting accurate vblank sequence > numbers all the time they may disable the vblank disable timer > entirely. In that case it seems appropriate to kick start the > vblank interrupts already from drm_vblank_on(). > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrj?l? <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 9 ++++++--- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > index 82a039a..6376d96 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > @@ -1126,9 +1126,12 @@ void drm_vblank_on(struct drm_device *dev, int crtc) > vblank->last = > (dev->driver->get_vblank_counter(dev, crtc) - 1) & > dev->max_vblank_count; > - > - /* re-enable interrupts if there's are users left */ > - if (atomic_read(&vblank->refcount) != 0) > + /* > + * re-enable interrupts if there are users left, or the > + * user wishes vblank interrupts to be enabled all the time. > + */ > + if (atomic_read(&vblank->refcount) != 0 || > + (!dev->vblank_disable_immediate && drm_vblank_offdelay < 0))
As noted on patch 10, wouldn't it make sense for the user-provided module parameter override the driver ability to disable immediately in this case where they've specifically asked for "never disable?" Otherwise, patches 12-14 are Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> > WARN_ON(drm_vblank_enable(dev, crtc)); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags); > } > -- > 1.8.5.5 > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Matt Roper Graphics Software Engineer IoTG Platform Enabling & Development Intel Corporation (916) 356-2795
