From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Introduce accurate frontbuffer
 tracking
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:55:31 +0200
Message-ID: <20140618155531.GK5821@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1403092757-31421-12-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <1403096485-26669-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <20140618145544.GQ31023@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-wg0-f49.google.com (mail-wg0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA946E36B
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id y10so1047686wgg.8
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140618145544.GQ31023@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>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:55:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > +void i915_gem_update_fb_bits(struct drm_i915_gem_object *old,
> > +			     struct drm_i915_gem_object *new,
> > +			     unsigned frontbuffer_bits);
> > +
> 
> Time to be a nuisance:
> 
> i915_gem_object_track_fb()
> 
> The key part is that is operates on the object. The other is just to try
> and shorten the name as compensation.

Hm, I've thought the i915_gem part is a giveaway - I'm not too fond of the
i915_gem_obj prefix since it's so long ...

> > @@ -1062,6 +1065,7 @@ intel_disable_plane(struct drm_plane *plane)
> >  	struct drm_device *dev = plane->dev;
> >  	struct intel_plane *intel_plane = to_intel_plane(plane);
> >  	struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc;
> > +	enum pipe pipe;
> >  
> >  	if (!plane->fb)
> >  		return 0;
> > @@ -1070,6 +1074,7 @@ intel_disable_plane(struct drm_plane *plane)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> >  	intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(plane->crtc);
> > +	pipe = intel_crtc->pipe;
> >  
> >  	if (intel_crtc->active) {
> >  		bool primary_was_enabled = intel_crtc->primary_enabled;
> > @@ -1088,6 +1093,8 @@ intel_disable_plane(struct drm_plane *plane)
> >  
> >  		mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> >  		intel_unpin_fb_obj(intel_plane->obj);
> > +		i915_gem_update_fb_bits(intel_plane->obj, NULL,
> > +					INTEL_FRONTBUFFER_SPRITE(pipe));
> 
> Introducing a local here for a one off, or was checkpatch in an angry
> mood with INTEL_FRONTBUFFER_SPRITE(intel_crtc->pipe) ?

Just a case of shortening the line a bit, it looks terribly ugly imo. I
hope we can prettify this once we have a bit more unified nuclear flip
logic for all planes.

> That's all I spotted, the logic looks fine. But just remind me,
> i915_gem_object_track_fb() did do a lockdep_assert_held(&dev->struct_mutex)?

Yeah, both when new or old are non-NULL, as a prep for per-object locking.
If we ever get there ;-)
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch