On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:03:52PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 02:26:55PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > > > On 27/10/15 13:48, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:34:44PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > >> > > >>On 27/10/15 12:51, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > >>>On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:23:26PM -0700, Vivek Kasireddy wrote: > > >>>>While pinning a fb object to the display plane, only install a fence > > >>>>if the object is using a normal view. This corresponds with the > > >>>>behavior found in i915_gem_object_do_pin() where the fencability > > >>>>criteria is determined only for objects with normal views. > > >>>> > > >>>>v2: > > >>>>Look at the object's map_and_fenceable flag to determine whether to > > >>>>install a fence or not (Chris). > > >>>> > > >>>>Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > >>>>Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com> > > >>>>Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> > > >>>>Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasire...@intel.com> > > >>>>--- > > >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 3 ++- > > >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >>>> > > >>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > >>>>b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > >>>>index 52fb3f2..108c000 100644 > > >>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > >>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > >>>>@@ -2357,7 +2357,8 @@ intel_pin_and_fence_fb_obj(struct drm_plane > > >>>>*plane, > > >>>> * framebuffer compression. For simplicity, we always install > > >>>> * a fence as the cost is not that onerous. > > >>>> */ > > >>>>- ret = i915_gem_object_get_fence(obj); > > >>>>+ if (obj->map_and_fenceable) > > >>> > > >>>This will now get the fence and pin it for the 90/270 view as well, > > >>>even though the fence doesn't even cover that particualr gtt mapping. > > >> > > >>I don't follow. obj->map_and_fenceable will be true only when normal > > >>view exists, so this avoids setting up the fence when no normal view > > >>exists and so avoids the WARN_ON in i915_gem_object_get_fence. > > > > > >Sure, but it's pointless to use up a fence if all we care about > > >is the 90/270 mapping. > > > > After a brief IRC discussion we agreed that the patch doesn't > > introduce any new negative behaviours. > > Urm, consider > > intel_unpin_fb_obj(): > ... > i915_gem_object_unpin_fence(intel_fb_obj(obj));
We'll have (pointlessly) pinned the fence too, so I think it'll end up working. I would have just put in view==NORMAL checks myself as an interim solution to avoid that, but whatever. > > > So if the fb is bound both in rotated and non-rotated modes, we will > have a fence for the object and try to unpin it twice => WARN (Daniel is > being too nice, once upon a time that was rightfully a BUG for a major > screwup). > > We want to track the fence state on the vma and associated that vma with > the plane_state so that the tracking doesn't get so easily confused. > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
