Re: [PATCH] drm: Factor-out drm_emit_vblank_event code. (v2)

[Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 01:57:10PM +1000, christopher.halse.rogers@canonical.com wrote:
> From: Christopher James Halse Rogers <christopher.halse.rogers@canonical.com>
> 
> v2: Also pull out the drm_vblank_put call.
> Signed-off-by: Christopher James Halse Rogers <christopher.halse.rogers@canonical.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c |   44 ++++++++++++++++++--------------------------
>  1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> index 982ca8c..da56685 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> @@ -931,6 +931,20 @@ void drm_vblank_put(struct drm_device *dev, int crtc)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_vblank_put);
>  
> +static void drm_emit_vblank_event (struct drm_device *dev,
> +				   struct drm_pending_vblank_event *e,
> +				   unsigned int seq, struct timeval *now)
> +{
> +	e->event.sequence = seq;
> +	e->event.tv_sec = now->tv_sec;
> +	e->event.tv_usec = now->tv_usec;
> +	drm_vblank_put(dev, e->pipe);
> +	list_move_tail(&e->base.link, &e->base.file_priv->event_list);
> +	wake_up_interruptible(&e->base.file_priv->event_wait);
> +	trace_drm_vblank_event_delivered(e->base.pid, e->pipe,
> +					 e->event.sequence);
> +}
> +
>  void drm_vblank_off(struct drm_device *dev, int crtc)
>  {
>  	struct drm_pending_vblank_event *e, *t;
> @@ -951,14 +965,7 @@ void drm_vblank_off(struct drm_device *dev, int crtc)
>  			  wanted %d, current %d\n",
>  			  e->event.sequence, seq);
>  
> -		e->event.sequence = seq;
> -		e->event.tv_sec = now.tv_sec;
> -		e->event.tv_usec = now.tv_usec;
> -		drm_vblank_put(dev, e->pipe);
> -		list_move_tail(&e->base.link, &e->base.file_priv->event_list);
> -		wake_up_interruptible(&e->base.file_priv->event_wait);
> -		trace_drm_vblank_event_delivered(e->base.pid, e->pipe,
> -						 e->event.sequence);
> +		drm_emit_vblank_event(dev, e, seq, &now);
>  	}
>  
>  	WARN_ON(atomic_read(&dev->vblank_refcount[crtc]) != 0);
> @@ -1104,18 +1111,10 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
>  				      vblwait->request.sequence);
>  
>  	e->event.sequence = vblwait->request.sequence;
> +	list_add_tail(&e->base.link, &dev->vblank_event_list);

Is &dev->vblank_event_list == &e->base.file_priv->event_list?
If they are not equal this is changing the behavior...

>  	if ((seq - vblwait->request.sequence) <= (1 << 23)) {
> -		e->event.sequence = seq;
> -		e->event.tv_sec = now.tv_sec;
> -		e->event.tv_usec = now.tv_usec;
> -		drm_vblank_put(dev, pipe);
> -		list_add_tail(&e->base.link, &e->base.file_priv->event_list);
> -		wake_up_interruptible(&e->base.file_priv->event_wait);
> -		vblwait->reply.sequence = seq;

Is it OK to drop this substitution?

> -		trace_drm_vblank_event_delivered(current->pid, pipe,
> -						 vblwait->request.sequence);
> +		drm_emit_vblank_event(dev, e, seq, &now);
>  	} else {
> -		list_add_tail(&e->base.link, &dev->vblank_event_list);
>  		vblwait->reply.sequence = vblwait->request.sequence;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1249,14 +1248,7 @@ void drm_handle_vblank_events(struct drm_device *dev, int crtc)
>  		DRM_DEBUG("vblank event on %d, current %d\n",
>  			  e->event.sequence, seq);
>  
> -		e->event.sequence = seq;
> -		e->event.tv_sec = now.tv_sec;
> -		e->event.tv_usec = now.tv_usec;
> -		drm_vblank_put(dev, e->pipe);
> -		list_move_tail(&e->base.link, &e->base.file_priv->event_list);
> -		wake_up_interruptible(&e->base.file_priv->event_wait);
> -		trace_drm_vblank_event_delivered(e->base.pid, e->pipe,
> -						 e->event.sequence);
> +		drm_emit_vblank_event(dev, e, seq, &now);
>  	}
>  
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->event_lock, flags);
> --