On 1/12/26 09:26, Murthy, Arun R wrote:
> On 09-01-2026 16:53, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> On 1/9/26 12:08, Murthy, Arun R wrote:
>>>> From: Michel Dänzer <[email protected]>
>>>> On 1/8/26 10:43, Arun R Murthy wrote:
>>>>> Along with async flip if there is a request to disable a sync plane by
>>>>> providing a NULL fb allow them.
>>>> That could result in async changes to other planes taking effect in an 
>>>> earlier
>>>> refresh cycle than the sync plane being disabled, couldn't it? In which 
>>>> case the
>>>> commit arguably wouldn't actually be "atomic".
>>>>
>>> This is the request from the community to allow disabling of a sync plane 
>>> in an async flip atomic ioctl.
>>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13834
>> Can't see any such request there. I suspect there might be a 
>> misunderstanding.
> 
> Here cursor is a sync flip.
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13834#note_2855843

Not sure what you mean.

The cursor plane is disabled in KWin's atomic commits with 
DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC, so it's irrelevant for them.

In the comment following the one you referenced, Xaver (one of the main KWin 
developers) agreed that KWin not setting DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC in the commit 
which disables the cursor plane is fine.

I see no request for being able to mix sync & async plane updates in a single 
commit.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer       \        GNOME / Xwayland / Mesa developer
https://redhat.com             \               Libre software enthusiast

Reply via email to