On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 12:07:01PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 09-02-16 om 11:42 schreef Ville Syrjälä: > > On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 11:27:44AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >> Hey, > >> > >> Op 13-01-16 om 13:58 schreef Ville Syrjälä: > >>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:27:42PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >>>> Currently we perform our own wait in post_plane_update, > >>>> but the atomic core performs another one in wait_for_vblanks. > >>>> This means that 2 vblanks are done when a fb is changed, > >>>> which is a bit overkill. > >>>> > >>>> Merge them by creating a helper function that takes a crtc mask > >>>> for the planes to wait on. > >>>> > >>>> The broadwell vblank workaround may look gone entirely but this is > >>>> not the case. pipe_config->wm_changed is set to true > >>>> when any plane is turned on, which forces a vblank wait. > >>> Still NAK, because you just removed the comment entirely. > >> I may have removed the comment but there will always be an unconditional > >> wait because of the wm changes. > >> In some future commit I will rework do_intel_finish_page_flip to deal with > >> atomic, and in that function the comment > >> will be useful again. > > The comment is the spec here, so it should be kept. Actually what I > > really want is to stop using the flip done interrupt entirely since > > it's arguably broken, at which point the comment should problably be > > moved to somewhere else (interrupt setup code, flip completion code, > > etc.). But removing the comment would be bad since then people might > > not understand why we do it the way we do. > I think the flip done interrupt will still be needed for cs flips, but Chris > was against removing it iirc. I'll move the comment to page_flip_finished for > now.
We don't really need it. Using the vblank interrupt should work just fine. > >>>> Changes since v1: > >>>> - Removing the double vblank wait on broadwell moved to its own commit. > >>>> Changes since v2: > >>>> - Move out POWER_DOMAIN_MODESET handling to its own commit. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c | 1 + > >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 80 > >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 2 +- > >>>> 3 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c > >>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c > >>>> index 9682d94af710..ba9a57f33c43 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_atomic.c > >>>> @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ intel_crtc_duplicate_state(struct drm_crtc *crtc) > >>>> crtc_state->disable_cxsr = false; > >>>> crtc_state->wm_changed = false; > >>>> crtc_state->wm.need_postvbl_update = false; > >>>> + crtc_state->fb_changed = false; > >>>> > >>>> return &crtc_state->base; > >>>> } > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > >>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > >>>> index 2aa1c5367625..eac73f005a70 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > >>>> @@ -4796,9 +4796,6 @@ static void intel_post_plane_update(struct > >>>> intel_crtc *crtc) > >>>> to_intel_crtc_state(crtc->base.state); > >>>> struct drm_device *dev = crtc->base.dev; > >>>> > >>>> - if (atomic->wait_vblank) > >>>> - intel_wait_for_vblank(dev, crtc->pipe); > >>>> - > >>>> intel_frontbuffer_flip(dev, atomic->fb_bits); > >>>> > >>>> crtc->wm.cxsr_allowed = true; > >>>> @@ -11872,6 +11869,9 @@ int intel_plane_atomic_calc_changes(struct > >>>> drm_crtc_state *crtc_state, > >>>> if (!was_visible && !visible) > >>>> return 0; > >>>> > >>>> + if (fb != old_plane_state->base.fb) > >>>> + pipe_config->fb_changed = true; > >>> Isn't that going to slow down cursor updates once again? > >> Very likely.. Shall I add a if (!state->legacy_cursor_update) to > >> intel_atomic_wait_for_vblanks ? > > Not sure. Still wishing we could have just had the proper fps>=vrefresh > > support fron the start. > > > Working on it! -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
