From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] drm/i915: implement
 ironlake_wait_for_vblank
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 14:44:24 +0200
Message-ID: <20120508124424.GJ4802@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1336010154-2946-1-git-send-email-przanoni@gmail.com>
	<1336162707-3504-1-git-send-email-przanoni@gmail.com>
	<1336162707-3504-2-git-send-email-przanoni@gmail.com>
	<20120508115519.GD4802@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<CA+gsUGQ0UoohVU9WBY1OsbX44A99XTWq3JGLWA2-d9PR8XeacA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-ey0-f177.google.com (mail-ey0-f177.google.com
	[209.85.215.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDBF9E905
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue,  8 May 2012 05:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eaak13 with SMTP id k13so1765004eaa.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 08 May 2012 05:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+gsUGQ0UoohVU9WBY1OsbX44A99XTWq3JGLWA2-d9PR8XeacA@mail.gmail.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>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@gmail.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 09:34:18AM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> 2012/5/8 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 05:18:15PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> >> From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
> >>
> >> intel_wait_for_vblank uses PIPESTAT, which does not exist on Ironlake
> >> and newer, so now we use PIPEFRAME.
> >>
> >> There's also a check to see if the pipe is stopped.
> >
> > Hm, why do we have this check here? The other wait_for_vblank
> > implementation doesn't bother with this. And if we call wait_for_vblank on
> > a disabled pipe, that's a bug imo.
> > -Daniel
> 
> Because not checking for a stopped pipe adds a useless 50ms delay
> (it's the wait_for() timeout). We're currently calling
> wait_for_vblank() on disabled pipes.
> - Maybe I should add a DRM_DEBUG_KMS message there and then start
> fixing these cases?
> - Maybe I should move the check to intel_wait_for_vblank (including
> the debug message)?

Either is fine, the thing that irked was just that now the semantics of
wait_for_vblank changed depending upon which chipset it runs on:
- for ilk, it will immediately return if the pipe is off
- for pre-ilk, it will time out for 50 ms, complain with a debug message
  and then return.

I'm leaning towards fixing up the callers to not call wait_for_vblank when
the pipe is off (and ditching the check from the ilk wait_for_vblank).
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48