On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 08:40:27PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Bypass all the spinlocks and return the last timestamp and counter from
> the last vblank if the driver delcares that it is accurate (and stable
> across on/off), and the vblank is currently enabled.
>
> This is dependent upon the both the hardware and driver to provide the
> proper barriers to facilitate reading our bookkeeping outside of the
> vblank interrupt and outside of the explicit vblank locks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Michel Dänzer <mic...@daenzer.net>
> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com>
> Cc: Dave Airlie <airl...@redhat.com>,
> Cc: Mario Kleiner <mario.kleiner...@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> index 53a526c7b24d..c55abce152a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> @@ -1559,6 +1559,17 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device
> *dev, unsigned int pipe,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static bool drm_wait_vblank_is_query(union drm_wait_vblank *vblwait)
> +{
> + if (vblwait->request.sequence)
> + return false;
> +
> + return _DRM_VBLANK_RELATIVE ==
> + (vblwait->request.type & (_DRM_VBLANK_TYPES_MASK |
> + _DRM_VBLANK_EVENT |
> + _DRM_VBLANK_NEXTONMISS));
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Wait for VBLANK.
> *
> @@ -1608,6 +1619,21 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>
> vblank = &dev->vblank[pipe];
>
> + /* If the counter is currently enabled and accurate, short-circuit
> queries
> + * to return the cached timestamp of the last vblank.
> + */
> + if (dev->vblank_disable_immediate &&
> + drm_wait_vblank_is_query(vblwait) &&
> + vblank->enabled) {
Hmm. I'm wondering if this could give us something stale if we're just
about to enable the vblank interrupt.
We seem to set enabled=true before we update the count/ts. So I'm
thinking we'd need to flip those around and make sure proper barriers
are in place.
> + struct timeval now;
> +
> + vblwait->reply.sequence =
> + drm_vblank_count_and_time(dev, pipe, &now);
> + vblwait->reply.tval_sec = now.tv_sec;
> + vblwait->reply.tval_usec = now.tv_usec;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> ret = drm_vblank_get(dev, pipe);
> if (ret) {
> DRM_DEBUG("crtc %d failed to acquire vblank counter, %d\n",
> pipe, ret);
> --
> 2.11.0
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
