On 1/12/26 16:20, Murthy, Arun R wrote: > > On 12-01-2026 16:54, Michel Dänzer wrote: >> 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. >> > Sorry maybe I might be creating more confusion or my words are not giving > clarity. > > Let me try to put it in simple words. > The > comment(https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13834#note_2857640) > from Xaver says that disabling of cursor plane along with a sync flip should > work.
Honestly can't see how that comment could be interpreted that way. Maybe Xaver can clarify. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer \ GNOME / Xwayland / Mesa developer https://redhat.com \ Libre software enthusiast
