On Die, 2012-12-18 at 21:25 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >
> > 1. Mimic the behaviour with a running CRTC as closely as possible
> > 2. Don't bother, just always wait for a fixed amount of time, say
> > some fraction of a s
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15096
--- Comment #23 from Michel Dänzer ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> This usually occurs using compiz when the monitors go into ACPI power save
> mode.
If it only happens at DPMS power save, it's probably not this bug but bug
49761.
--
You are r
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> In the original thread about this problem, you asked what the right
> thing to do would be. I gave my opinion on that, basically option 1
> above. I still think that would be ideal, especially if done the way you
> outlined, resulting in co
The following patch series is the version 3 of the fix that prevents
the application from rendering at uncontrolled rate as explained
in this thread:
http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-driver-ati/2012-December/024027.html
In this series all attempts to be "smart" and emulate the real
CRTC behavior
From: Ilija Hadzic
This patch adds an option called consider_disabled to
radeon_pick_best_crtc function. If this option is set
and searching for best-fit CRTC yields nothing, the search
will be widened to include CRTCs in DPMS "off" state.
The new option is not used yet; it will be in the patches
From: Ilija Hadzic
Return pointer to the CRTC instead of CRTC ID and expose
consider_disabled option in arguments of this function.
Signed-off-by: Ilija Hadzic
---
src/radeon_dri2.c | 44
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git
From: Ilija Hadzic
If drawable is displayed on a CRTC and relevant CRTC is in
DPMS off state, defer the swap by a fixed (hard-coded) time.
This patch fixes a bug that caused an application to render
at uncontrolled rate when CRTC goes into DPMS "off" state,
thus thrashing the GPU and CPU and lik
On Mit, 2012-12-19 at 10:18 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >
> > In the original thread about this problem, you asked what the right
> > thing to do would be. I gave my opinion on that, basically option 1
> > above. I still think that would be
On Mit, 2012-12-19 at 10:35 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> The following patch series is the version 3 of the fix that prevents
> the application from rendering at uncontrolled rate as explained
> in this thread:
>
> http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-driver-ati/2012-December/024027.html
>
> In this
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15096
--- Comment #24 from in4mer+freedesktopbugzi...@gmail.com ---
Nope, don't think so
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
xorg-driver-ati mailing list
xorg-driver
10 matches
Mail list logo