From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: make CRTC enable/disable
 asynchronous v2
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:47 -0700
Message-ID: <20140530120647.0640b411@jbarnes-desktop>
References: <1401473122-3451-1-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
 <20140530185622.GE10916@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-pd0-f171.google.com (mail-pd0-f171.google.com
 [209.85.192.171])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128196EB31
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f171.google.com with SMTP id y13so1248511pdi.2
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Fri, 30 May 2014 12:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140530185622.GE10916@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:56:22 +0100
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:05:21AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > +static void intel_queue_crtc_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> > +{
> > +	struct drm_device *dev = crtc->dev;
> > +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> > +	struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
> > +	struct intel_crtc_work *work;
> > +
> > +	WARN(!mutex_is_locked(&dev->mode_config.mutex),
> > +	     "need mode_config mutex\n");
> > +
> > +	work = kmalloc(sizeof(*work), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!work) {
> > +		dev_priv->display._crtc_disable(&intel_crtc->base);
> > +		return;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	work->enable = true;
> > +	work->intel_crtc = intel_crtc;
> > +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&work->head);
> (redundant, list_add doesn't care)

Will fix.

> > +
> > +	list_add_tail(&dev_priv->crtc_work_queue, &work->head);
> > +	schedule_work(&dev_priv->crtc_work);
> > +}
> 
> If we tracked one queued item per crtc, we could avoid the allocation
> and allow for elision of pending operations.

Yeah I thought about that too, might make for a good optimization, but
I figured this was simplest to start with.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center