Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 0/4] Fixes for damage clips handling

["Hogander, Jouni" <jouni.hogander@intel.com>]

On Tue, 2022-09-13 at 12:04 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 02:29:16PM +0300, Jouni Högander wrote:
> > Currently damage clips handling is broken for planes when using big
> > framebuffer + offset in case kms driver adjusts drm_plane_state.src
> > coords. This is because damage clips are using coords relative to
> > original coords from user-space.
> > 
> > This patchset is fixing this by using original
> > coords from user-space instead of drm_plane_state.src when
> > iterating
> > damage_clips.
> > 
> > v2: Modify drm unit tests accordingly
> > 
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> > Cc: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
> > Cc: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@riseup.net>
> > 
> > Jouni Högander (4):
> >   drm: Use original src rect while initializing damage iterator
> >   drm/i915/display: Use original src in psr2 sel fetch area
> > calculation
> >   drm/i915/display: Use drm helper instead of own loop for damage
> > clips
> >   drm/tests: Set also mock plane src_x, src_y, src_w and src_h
> 
> Do these need to be applied into the same tree, or can
> the drm vs. i915 stuff go in separately?

Patch 1 and 2 are needed to fix that bigfb handling for i915. Patch 4
is also needed to prevent breaking tests. Patch 3 is more like cleanup.

I think i915 patches could go via i915 tree. This just means that i915
bigfb handling isn't fixed by either of the sets alone.
 
> 
> > 
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_damage_helper.c           | 11 ++++++----
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c      | 20 +++++++--------
> > ----
> >  .../gpu/drm/tests/drm_damage_helper_test.c    |  5 +++++
> >  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > 2.34.1
>