Re: CDF meeting @FOSDEM report

2013-02-13 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/12/2013 11:45 PM, Stéphane Marchesin wrote: - Do we need to support chaining several encoders ? We can come up with > several theoretical use cases, some of them probably exist in real hardware, > but the details are still a bit fuzzy. So, a part which is completely omitted in this threa

CDF meeting @FOSDEM report

2013-02-13 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/12/2013 11:45 PM, St?phane Marchesin wrote: >> - Do we need to support chaining several encoders ? We can come up with >> > several theoretical use cases, some of them probably exist in real >> > hardware, >> > but the details are still a bit fuzzy. > So, a part which is completely omitted

Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Den 12 feb 2013 23:02 skrev "Greg KH" : > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:04:53PM +0100, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > > 3) Daniel V hinted that multiple parents (or multiple busses) is > > something that has been discussed as a limitation of device driver > > model

Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/12/2013 04:53 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 2013-02-12 17:04, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > >> Now we have some different types of panels which are attached on a >> combination of busses: >> >> a) control:DBI, data:DBI >> b) control:I2C/SPI, data:I2C/SPI

Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Hi Greg, at FOSDEM we had a session on CDF (Common Display Framework). You can read more details about this in the posts from Laurent Pinchart on dridevel: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2012-November/030888.html http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2013-February/034576

Re: Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Den 12 feb 2013 23:02 skrev "Greg KH" : > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:04:53PM +0100, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > > 3) Daniel V hinted that multiple parents (or multiple busses) is > > something that has been discussed as a limitation of device driver > > model

Re: Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/12/2013 04:53 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-12 17:04, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: Now we have some different types of panels which are attached on a combination of busses: a) control:DBI, data:DBI b) control:I2C/SPI, data:I2C/SPI c) control:static setup, data:DPI d) control:I2C/SPI

Multiple parents in device driver model and Common Display Framework (CDF)

2013-02-12 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Hi Greg, at FOSDEM we had a session on CDF (Common Display Framework). You can read more details about this in the posts from Laurent Pinchart on dridevel: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2012-November/030888.html http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2013-February/0345

[RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-11 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/11/2013 09:21 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 2013-02-08 16:54, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >> On 02/08/2013 03:02 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>> On 2013-02-08 15:28, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >>> >>>> When we do that we stop->setup->start during blanki

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-11 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/11/2013 09:21 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-08 16:54, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 02/08/2013 03:02 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-08 15:28, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: When we do that we stop->setup->start during blanking. So our "DSS" is optimized to be able to

[RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 03:02 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 2013-02-08 15:28, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > >> When we do that we stop->setup->start during blanking. So our "DSS" is >> optimized to be able to do that without getting blocked. All DSI video >> mode panel

[RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 02:04 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 2013-02-08 14:40, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > >> I agree, but I think it should be >> setup->enable->video_on->video_off->disable->setup->... >> I don't think there is any interface parameters that sho

[RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 11:51 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 2013-02-04 12:05, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > >> As discussed at FOSDEM I will give DSI bus with full feature set a >> try. > Please do, but as a reminder I want to raise the issues I see with a DSI > bus: > > - A dev

[RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 12:40 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > Hi, > > On 2013-02-03 21:17, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> Hi Laurent, >> >> On Saturday 02 of February 2013 11:39:59 Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> Hi Tomasz, >>> >>> Thank you for your RFC. >>> >>> On Wednesday 30 January 2013 16:38:59 Tomasz Figa wrote:

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 03:02 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-08 15:28, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: When we do that we stop->setup->start during blanking. So our "DSS" is optimized to be able to do that without getting blocked. All DSI video mode panels (and DPI) products we have done

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 02:04 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-08 14:40, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: I agree, but I think it should be setup->enable->video_on->video_off->disable->setup->... I don't think there is any interface parameters that should be changed while link is en

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 11:51 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: On 2013-02-04 12:05, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: As discussed at FOSDEM I will give DSI bus with full feature set a try. Please do, but as a reminder I want to raise the issues I see with a DSI bus: - A device can be a child of only one bus. So if

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Common Display Framework-TF

2013-02-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/08/2013 12:40 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: Hi, On 2013-02-03 21:17, Tomasz Figa wrote: Hi Laurent, On Saturday 02 of February 2013 11:39:59 Laurent Pinchart wrote: Hi Tomasz, Thank you for your RFC. On Wednesday 30 January 2013 16:38:59 Tomasz Figa wrote: Changes done to Tomi's edition

[RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-02-04 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/02/2013 12:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Marcus, > > On Tuesday 08 January 2013 18:08:19 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >> On 01/08/2013 05:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: >>> On Tuesday 08 of January 2013 11:12:26 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: [...] >>>> But it is not

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-02-04 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 02/02/2013 12:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: Hi Marcus, On Tuesday 08 January 2013 18:08:19 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 01/08/2013 05:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: On Tuesday 08 of January 2013 11:12:26 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: [...] But it is not perfect. After a couple of products we

[Linaro-mm-sig] CDF discussions at FOSDEM

2013-01-29 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/29/2013 04:50 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Daniel Vetter > wrote: > Ok, in the interest of pre-heating the discussion a bit I've written down > my thoughts about display slave drivers. Adding a few more people and > lists to make sure I haven't missed anyone .

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] CDF discussions at FOSDEM

2013-01-29 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/29/2013 04:50 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Ok, in the interest of pre-heating the discussion a bit I've written down my thoughts about display slave drivers. Adding a few more people and lists to make sure I haven't missed anyone ... Cheer

[RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-01-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/08/2013 05:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Tuesday 08 of January 2013 11:12:26 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >> On 01/08/2013 09:18 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Thursday 27 December 2012 15:43:34 Tomasz Figa wrote: >>>>> On Monday 24 of December 201

[RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-01-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/08/2013 09:18 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Thursday 27 December 2012 15:43:34 Tomasz Figa wrote: >> > On Monday 24 of December 2012 15:12:28 Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> > > On Friday 21 December 2012 11:00:52 Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > On Tuesday 18 of December 2012 08:31:30 Vika

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-01-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/08/2013 05:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: On Tuesday 08 of January 2013 11:12:26 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 01/08/2013 09:18 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: On Thursday 27 December 2012 15:43:34 Tomasz Figa wrote: On Monday 24 of December 2012 15:12:28 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Fri

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2013-01-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 01/08/2013 09:18 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: On Thursday 27 December 2012 15:43:34 Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Monday 24 of December 2012 15:12:28 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Friday 21 December 2012 11:00:52 Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > On Tuesday 18 of December 2012 08:31:30 Vikas Sajjan

[RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2012-12-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 12/18/2012 06:04 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: >> Many developers showed interest in the first RFC, and I've had the >> opportunity >> to discuss it with most of them. I would like to thank (in no particular >> order) Tomi Valkeinen for all the time he spend helpi

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

2012-12-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 12/18/2012 06:04 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: Many developers showed interest in the first RFC, and I've had the opportunity to discuss it with most of them. I would like to thank (in no particular order) Tomi Valkeinen for all the time he spend helping me to draft v2, Marcus Lorentzon fo

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 06:06 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: >> > If you smash everything into one ioctl, I imagine you have plenty of fun >> > implementing all this. Which is why I prefer to split this up. > I don't think there's that much differnce. You build up the full device > state, check it, and when you'

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 05:43 PM, Luc Verhaegen wrote: > This means that there should be (at least) three separate actions: > * page flipping: buffers -> planes at next vblank, for a list of > buffer(s) and plane tuples. > * setplanes: colour format, position, scaling, ordering, rotation, color > key, crtc

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 05:27 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >> On 04/18/2012 04:36 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> Last time around I've discussed with people we've ended up with 2 new >>> ioctls: >>>

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 04:36 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Last time around I've discussed with people we've ended up with 2 new > ioctls: > > - atomic modeset, to configure the output state on more than one crtc at >the same time. This is useful to get pll assignement, memory bandwidth >constrains and

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 04:26 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:04:56PM +0200, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: >> On 04/18/2012 02:25 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Joonyoung Shim >>> wrote: >>>> On 04/18/2012 05:46 PM, Da

[RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 02:25 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Joonyoung Shim > wrote: >> On 04/18/2012 05:46 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:31:59PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: DRM_MODE_PLANE_EVENT is similar to DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT but it is f

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 06:06 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > If you smash everything into one ioctl, I imagine you have plenty of fun > implementing all this. Which is why I prefer to split this up. I don't think there's that much differnce. You build up the full device state, check it, and when you're read

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 05:43 PM, Luc Verhaegen wrote: This means that there should be (at least) three separate actions: * page flipping: buffers -> planes at next vblank, for a list of buffer(s) and plane tuples. * setplanes: colour format, position, scaling, ordering, rotation, color key, crtc adheranc

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 05:27 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 04/18/2012 04:36 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Last time around I've discussed with people we've ended up with 2 new ioctls: - atomic modeset, to configure the output sta

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 04:36 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Last time around I've discussed with people we've ended up with 2 new ioctls: - atomic modeset, to configure the output state on more than one crtc at the same time. This is useful to get pll assignement, memory bandwidth constrains and similar

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 04:26 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:04:56PM +0200, Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 04/18/2012 02:25 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Joonyoung Shim wrote: On 04/18/2012 05:46 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:31:59PM

Re: [RFC PATCH] drm: Add plane event

2012-04-18 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 04/18/2012 02:25 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Joonyoung Shim wrote: On 04/18/2012 05:46 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:31:59PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: DRM_MODE_PLANE_EVENT is similar to DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT but it is for a plane. The s

[PATCH libdrm] libdrm: update drm/drm_fourcc.h from kernel to add multi plane formats

2012-03-30 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/30/2012 12:12 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: >> +#define DRM_FORMAT_NV12MT fourcc_code('T', 'M', '1', '2') /* 2x2 >> subsampled Cr:Cb plane 64x32 macroblocks */ > This one is more difficult. Until now tiling was always handled in > driver specific manner. OTOH if this format is really supported

[PATCH RFC 1/2] drm: add bitmask property type

2012-03-30 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/30/2012 12:37 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 08:15:48PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >>> From: Rob Clark >>> >>> A bitmask property is similar to an enum. The enum value is a bit >>> position (0-63), and valid property valu

Re: [PATCH libdrm] libdrm: update drm/drm_fourcc.h from kernel to add multi plane formats

2012-03-30 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/30/2012 12:12 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: +#define DRM_FORMAT_NV12MT fourcc_code('T', 'M', '1', '2') /* 2x2 subsampled Cr:Cb plane 64x32 macroblocks */ This one is more difficult. Until now tiling was always handled in driver specific manner. OTOH if this format is really supported by d

Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] drm: add bitmask property type

2012-03-30 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/30/2012 12:37 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 08:15:48PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Rob Clark wrote: From: Rob Clark A bitmask property is similar to an enum. The enum value is a bit position (0-63), and valid property values consist of a

[PATCH 4/5] drm/i915: add 'rotation' CRTC property

2012-03-20 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Hi Paulo, thanks for a quick response posting the patches. In my use of CRTC rotation properties, I need the change to be synchronized with modeset. Your implementation activate the property change immediately instead of staging it for next modeset. Do you think it is ok for different drivers t

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915: add 'rotation' CRTC property

2012-03-20 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
Hi Paulo, thanks for a quick response posting the patches. In my use of CRTC rotation properties, I need the change to be synchronized with modeset. Your implementation activate the property change immediately instead of staging it for next modeset. Do you think it is ok for different drivers

[Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] RFC: dma-buf: userspace mmap support

2012-03-19 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/19/2012 05:56 PM, Alan Cox wrote: >> display controller will be reading the front buffer, but the GPU >> > might also need to read that front buffer. So perhaps adding >> > "read-only"& "read-write" access flags to prepare could also be >> > interpreted as shared& exclusive accesses, if

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] RFC: dma-buf: userspace mmap support

2012-03-19 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/19/2012 05:56 PM, Alan Cox wrote: display controller will be reading the front buffer, but the GPU > might also need to read that front buffer. So perhaps adding > "read-only"& "read-write" access flags to prepare could also be > interpreted as shared& exclusive accesses, if we went do

[Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] RFC: dma-buf: userspace mmap support

2012-03-16 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/15/2012 02:32 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > From: Rob Clark > [snip] > In all cases, the mmap() call is allowed to fail, and the associated > dma_buf_ops are optional (mmap() will fail if at least the mmap() > op is not implemented by the exporter, but in either case the > {prepare,finish}_access()

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] RFC: dma-buf: userspace mmap support

2012-03-16 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/15/2012 02:32 AM, Rob Clark wrote: From: Rob Clark [snip] In all cases, the mmap() call is allowed to fail, and the associated dma_buf_ops are optional (mmap() will fail if at least the mmap() op is not implemented by the exporter, but in either case the {prepare,finish}_access() ops are op

Kernel Display and Video API Consolidation mini-summit at ELC 2012 - Notes

2012-03-02 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 2 March 2012 15:23, Heiko St?bner wrote: > Am Freitag, 17. Februar 2012, 00:25:51 schrieb Laurent Pinchart: > [...] > > For DSI, a possible abstraction level would be a DCS (Display Command > > Set) bus. Panels and/or HDMI-on-DSI transmitter drivers would be > > implemented as DCS drivers. >

Re: Kernel Display and Video API Consolidation mini-summit at ELC 2012 - Notes

2012-03-02 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 2 March 2012 15:23, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Am Freitag, 17. Februar 2012, 00:25:51 schrieb Laurent Pinchart: > [...] > > For DSI, a possible abstraction level would be a DCS (Display Command > > Set) bus. Panels and/or HDMI-on-DSI transmitter drivers would be > > implemented as DCS drivers. >

[RFC] Updated plane support v3

2011-06-22 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/22/2011 03:09 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > But I'm at least under the impression that some of the other SoC's > have similar flexibility to use video planes as either primary or > overlay layers. So I figure it is at least worth trying to handle > this in a more generic way if it doesn't cause too

Re: [RFC] Updated plane support v3

2011-06-22 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/22/2011 03:09 AM, Rob Clark wrote: But I'm at least under the impression that some of the other SoC's have similar flexibility to use video planes as either primary or overlay layers. So I figure it is at least worth trying to handle this in a more generic way if it doesn't cause too much

[RFC] Updated plane support v3

2011-06-21 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/20/2011 10:11 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > This version adds both source and dest rect params to the set_plane > ioctl, and makes the source fixed point to support hardware that needs > it. > > I haven't changed the name of the SNB implementation yet (per Chris's > suggestions) but will before i

Re: [RFC] Updated plane support v3

2011-06-21 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/20/2011 10:11 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: This version adds both source and dest rect params to the set_plane ioctl, and makes the source fixed point to support hardware that needs it. I haven't changed the name of the SNB implementation yet (per Chris's suggestions) but will before it gets up

[PATCH 1/4] drm: add plane support

2011-06-09 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/08/2011 08:54 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:41:17 +0200 > Marcus Lorentzon wrote: > > >> On 06/07/2011 11:01 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:07:39 -0700 >>> Jesse Barnes wrote: >>> >

Re: [PATCH 1/4] drm: add plane support

2011-06-09 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/08/2011 08:54 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:41:17 +0200 Marcus Lorentzon wrote: On 06/07/2011 11:01 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:07:39 -0700 Jesse Barnes wrote: +/* Planes blend with or override other bits on the CRTC */ +struct

[PATCH 1/4] drm: add plane support

2011-06-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/07/2011 11:01 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:07:39 -0700 > Jesse Barnes wrote: > > >> +/* Planes blend with or override other bits on the CRTC */ >> +struct drm_mode_set_plane { >> +__u32 plane_id; >> +__u32 crtc_id; >> +__u32 fb_id; /* contains surface form

Re: [PATCH 1/4] drm: add plane support

2011-06-08 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 06/07/2011 11:01 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:07:39 -0700 Jesse Barnes wrote: +/* Planes blend with or override other bits on the CRTC */ +struct drm_mode_set_plane { + __u32 plane_id; + __u32 crtc_id; + __u32 fb_id; /* contains surface format type */

[PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2011-03-14 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/12/2011 04:59 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 04:34:22PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: >> >>> This doesn't seem that different from the graphics chips we support >>> with kms. I don't think it would require much

Re: [PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2011-03-14 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 03/12/2011 04:59 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 04:34:22PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: This doesn't seem that different from the graphics chips we support with kms. I don't think it would require much work to use K

[PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2010-12-17 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 12/17/2010 12:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> * When I talk about a bus, I mean 'struct bus_type', which identifies >>> all devices with a uniform bus interface to their parent device >>> (think: PCI, USB, I2C). You seem to think of a bus as a specific >>> instance of that bus type,

Re: [PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2010-12-17 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 12/17/2010 12:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: * When I talk about a bus, I mean 'struct bus_type', which identifies all devices with a uniform bus interface to their parent device (think: PCI, USB, I2C). You seem to think of a bus as a specific instance of that bus type, i.e. the devic

[PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2010-12-16 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 11/26/2010 12:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > [dri people: please have a look at the KMS discussion way below] > > On Thursday 25 November 2010 19:00:26 Marcus LORENTZON wrote: > >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd at arndb.de] >

Re: [PATCH 09/10] MCDE: Add build files and bus

2010-12-16 Thread Marcus Lorentzon
On 11/26/2010 12:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: [dri people: please have a look at the KMS discussion way below] On Thursday 25 November 2010 19:00:26 Marcus LORENTZON wrote: -Original Message- From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:a...@arndb.de] Sent: den 25 november 2010 17:48 To: Marcus