Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/22] drm/vc4: vec: Check for VEC output constraints

2022-10-18 Thread Maxime Ripard
Hi, On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 08:16:32PM +0200, Mateusz Kwiatkowski wrote: > W dniu 13.10.2022 o 15:19, Maxime Ripard pisze: > > From: Mateusz Kwiatkowski > > > > The VEC can accept pretty much any relatively reasonable mode, but still > > has a bunch of constraints to meet. > > > > Let's create an

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/22] drm/vc4: vec: Check for VEC output constraints

2022-10-17 Thread Mateusz Kwiatkowski
Hi Maxime, Sorry about the mess that happened to the previous message. I hope this one will be delivered more cleanly. W dniu 13.10.2022 o 15:19, Maxime Ripard pisze: > From: Mateusz Kwiatkowski > > The VEC can accept pretty much any relatively reasonable mode, but still > has a bunch of constra

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/22] drm/vc4: vec: Check for VEC output constraints

2022-10-17 Thread Mateusz Kwiatkowski
Hi Maxime, W dniu 13.10.2022 o 15:19, Maxime Ripard pisze: > From: Mateusz Kwiatkowski > > The VEC can accept pretty much any relatively > reasonable mode, but still > has a bunch of constraints to meet. > > Let's > create an atomic_check() implementation that will make sure we > don't end up >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/22] drm/vc4: vec: Check for VEC output constraints

2022-10-13 Thread Maxime Ripard
From: Mateusz Kwiatkowski The VEC can accept pretty much any relatively reasonable mode, but still has a bunch of constraints to meet. Let's create an atomic_check() implementation that will make sure we don't end up accepting a non-functional mode. Acked-by: Noralf Trønnes Signed-off-by: Mate