Re: [PATCH 16/19] drm/i915: Use new atomic iterator macros in fbc

[Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>]

Em Qui, 2016-11-03 às 18:45 +0200, Ville Syrjälä escreveu:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:37:15PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com
> > >
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_fbc.c | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_fbc.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_fbc.c
> > index faa67624e1ed..0028335fc1bb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_fbc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_fbc.c
> > @@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ void intel_fbc_choose_crtc(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >  
> >  	mutex_lock(&fbc->lock);
> >  
> > -	for_each_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) {
> > +	for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) {
> >  		if (fbc->crtc == to_intel_crtc(crtc)) {
> >  			fbc_crtc_present = true;
> >  			break;
> > @@ -1074,14 +1074,14 @@ void intel_fbc_choose_crtc(struct
> > drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >  	 * plane. We could go for fancier schemes such as checking
> > the plane
> >  	 * size, but this would just affect the few platforms that
> > don't tie FBC
> >  	 * to pipe or plane A. */
> > -	for_each_plane_in_state(state, plane, plane_state, i) {
> > +	for_each_new_plane_in_state(state, plane, plane_state, i)
> > {
> >  		struct intel_plane_state *intel_plane_state =
> >  			to_intel_plane_state(plane_state);
> >  
> >  		if (!intel_plane_state->base.visible)
> >  			continue;
> 
> Unrelated but this thing looks somewhat bogus. FBC is tied to the
> primary plane only, so why do we care about the visibility of the
> other
> planes? Adding Paulo to Cc...

Looks like you've found a bug... Thanks! We should really be iterating
over primary planes only. Adding to the TODO list.

> 
> > 
> >  
> > -		for_each_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, j)
> > {
> > +		for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc,
> > crtc_state, j) {
> 
> Also, can't this inner loop be replaced with a simple
> crtc = plane_state->crtc ?

Is there a way to get the proposed crtc_state without the loop?


> 
> > 
> >  			struct intel_crtc_state *intel_crtc_state
> > =
> >  				to_intel_crtc_state(crtc_state);
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.7.4
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
> 
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx