Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH 4/4] xf86-video-omapfb: add patch for fixing segfault on starting X when using VRFB

2011-09-02 Thread Martin Jansa
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 09:01:13PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Le 01/09/2011 17:50, Martin Jansa a écrit :
  From: Sebastian Krzyszkowiakd...@dosowisko.net
 
  Signed-off-by: Martin Jansamartin.ja...@gmail.com
  ---
.../0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch |  320 
  
.../xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb_git.bb   |3 +-
2 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 
  meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch
 
 why does this driver is inside meta-oe layer instead of the TI layer ?

mostly because N900 also using xf86-video-omapfb is not built by TI :)
 
 btw, as we are starting porting our bsp against meta-oc, is there a document 
 describing how the layers are splitted ?
 
 Eric
 
 ___
 Openembedded-devel mailing list
 Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
 http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel


Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH 4/4] xf86-video-omapfb: add patch for fixing segfault on starting X when using VRFB

2011-09-02 Thread Eric Bénard

Le 02/09/2011 09:16, Martin Jansa a écrit :

On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 09:01:13PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:

Hi,

Le 01/09/2011 17:50, Martin Jansa a écrit :

From: Sebastian Krzyszkowiakd...@dosowisko.net

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansamartin.ja...@gmail.com
---
   .../0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch |  320 

   .../xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb_git.bb   |3 +-
   2 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
   create mode 100644 
meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch


why does this driver is inside meta-oe layer instead of the TI layer ?


mostly because N900 also using xf86-video-omapfb is not built by TI :)


btw, as we are starting porting our bsp against meta-oc, is there a document
describing how the layers are splitted ?

OK, I was thinking that the ti layer was the base layer for products using TI 
cpu and not only the layer of products built by TI ;-)


Eric


___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel


[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH 4/4] xf86-video-omapfb: add patch for fixing segfault on starting X when using VRFB

2011-09-01 Thread Martin Jansa
From: Sebastian Krzyszkowiak d...@dosowisko.net

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa martin.ja...@gmail.com
---
 .../0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch |  320 
 .../xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb_git.bb   |3 +-
 2 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 
meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch

diff --git 
a/meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch
 
b/meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000..4d2ecd3
--- /dev/null
+++ 
b/meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,320 @@
+From 9f034f7a83751e4d1bbff6dd742d54bd96d38230 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Eino-Ville Talvala talv...@stanford.edu
+Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:37:01 +0200
+Subject: [PATCH] Attempt to fix VRFB Signed-off-by: Sebastian Krzyszkowiak
+ d...@dosowisko.net
+
+---
+ src/image-format-conversions.c |4 +-
+ src/image-format-conversions.h |2 +-
+ src/omapfb-driver.c|   28 +--
+ src/omapfb-xv-blizzard.c   |1 +
+ src/omapfb-xv-generic.c|   72 +++
+ src/omapfb-xv.c|3 ++
+ 6 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/src/image-format-conversions.c b/src/image-format-conversions.c
+index dcefa9b..d43427d 100644
+--- a/src/image-format-conversions.c
 b/src/image-format-conversions.c
+@@ -38,13 +38,13 @@
+ #include image-format-conversions.h
+ 
+ /* Basic line-based copy for packed formats */
+-void packed_line_copy(int w, int h, int stride, uint8_t *src, uint8_t *dest)
++void packed_line_copy(int w, int h, int src_stride, int dst_stride, uint8_t 
*src, uint8_t *dest)
+ {
+   int i;
+   int len = w * 2;
+   for (i = 0; i  h; i++)
+   {
+-  memcpy(dest + i * len, src + i * stride, len);
++  memcpy(dest + i * dst_stride, src + i * src_stride, len);
+   }
+ }
+ 
+diff --git a/src/image-format-conversions.h b/src/image-format-conversions.h
+index 584896a..ba7caf2 100644
+--- a/src/image-format-conversions.h
 b/src/image-format-conversions.h
+@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
+ #include stdint.h
+ 
+ /* Basic line-based copy for packed formats */
+-void packed_line_copy(int w, int h, int stride, uint8_t *src, uint8_t *dest);
++void packed_line_copy(int w, int h, int src_stride, int dst_stride, uint8_t 
*src, uint8_t *dest);
+ 
+ /* Basic C implementation of YV12/I420 to UYVY conversion */
+ void uv12_to_uyvy(int w, int h, int y_pitch, int uv_pitch, uint8_t *y_p, 
uint8_t *u_p, uint8_t *v_p, uint8_t *dest);
+diff --git a/src/omapfb-driver.c b/src/omapfb-driver.c
+index 48aa09c..07989f5 100644
+--- a/src/omapfb-driver.c
 b/src/omapfb-driver.c
+@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@
+ #define OMAPFB_VERSION 1000
+ #define OMAPFB_DRIVER_NAME OMAPFB
+ #define OMAPFB_NAME omapfb
++#define ENFORCE_MODES
+ 
+ static Bool OMAPFBProbe(DriverPtr drv, int flags);
+ static Bool OMAPFBPreInit(ScrnInfoPtr pScrn, int flags);
+@@ -105,11 +106,13 @@ static SymTabRec OMAPFBChipsets[] = {
+ typedef enum {
+   OPTION_ACCELMETHOD,
+   OPTION_FB,
++  OPTION_ROTATE,
+ } FBDevOpts;
+ 
+ static const OptionInfoRec OMAPFBOptions[] = {
+   { OPTION_ACCELMETHOD,   AccelMethod,  OPTV_STRING,{0},FALSE },
+   { OPTION_FB,fb,   OPTV_STRING,{0},FALSE },
++  { OPTION_ROTATE,rotation, OPTV_STRING,{0},FALSE },
+   { -1,   NULL,   OPTV_NONE,  {0},FALSE }
+ };
+ 
+@@ -286,6 +289,7 @@ OMAPFBPreInit(ScrnInfoPtr pScrn, int flags)
+ {
+   OMAPFBPtr ofb;
+   EntityInfoPtr pEnt;
++  char *rotate;
+   rgb zeros = { 0, 0, 0 };
+   struct stat st;
+ 
+@@ -379,6 +383,8 @@ OMAPFBPreInit(ScrnInfoPtr pScrn, int flags)
+   pScrn-progClock = TRUE;
+   pScrn-chipset   = omapfb;
+   
++  xf86DrvMsg(pScrn-scrnIndex, X_INFO, Rotate test version 0.02\n);
++  
+   /* Start with configured virtual size */
+   pScrn-virtualX = pScrn-display-virtualX;
+   pScrn-virtualY = pScrn-display-virtualY;
+@@ -496,12 +502,21 @@ OMAPFBScreenInit(int scrnIndex, ScreenPtr pScreen, int 
argc, char **argv)
+   ofb-CloseScreen = pScreen-CloseScreen;
+   pScreen-CloseScreen = OMAPFBCloseScreen;
+ 
++  /* Enforce the default mode (this is silly I guess) */
++#ifdef ENFORCE_MODES
++  //xf86DrvMsg(pScrn-scrnIndex, X_INFO, Enforcing modes\n);
++  //set_mode(ofb, ofb-default_mode);
++  //pScrn-displayWidth = ofb-fixed_info.line_length /
++  //  (ofb-state_info.bits_per_pixel3); //ofb-state_info.xres;
++#endif
++
+   /* Map our framebuffer memory */
++  ofb-mem_info.size = ofb-fixed_info.line_length * ofb-state_info.yres;
+   ofb-fb = mmap (NULL, ofb-mem_info.size,
+   PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, 

Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH 4/4] xf86-video-omapfb: add patch for fixing segfault on starting X when using VRFB

2011-09-01 Thread Eric Bénard

Hi,

Le 01/09/2011 17:50, Martin Jansa a écrit :

From: Sebastian Krzyszkowiakd...@dosowisko.net

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansamartin.ja...@gmail.com
---
  .../0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch |  320 
  .../xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb_git.bb   |3 +-
  2 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 
meta-oe/recipes-graphics/xorg-driver/xf86-video-omapfb/0004-Attempt-to-fix-VRFB.patch


why does this driver is inside meta-oe layer instead of the TI layer ?

btw, as we are starting porting our bsp against meta-oc, is there a document 
describing how the layers are splitted ?


Eric

___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel