From: "Ondřej Jirman" <megous@megous.com> To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: sun8i-ui/vi: Fix layer zpos change/atomic modesetting Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:23:09 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190918152309.j2dbu63jaru6jn2t@core.my.home> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190918141734.kerdbbaynwutrxf6@gilmour> Hi, On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 04:17:34PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 12:03:37AM +0200, megous@megous.com wrote: > > From: Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com> > > > > There are various issues that this re-work of sun8i_[uv]i_layer_enable > > function fixes: > > > > - Make sure that we re-initialize zpos on reset > > - Minimize register updates by doing them only when state changes > > - Fix issue where DE pipe might get disabled even if it is no longer > > used by the layer that's currently calling sun8i_ui_layer_enable > > - .atomic_disable callback is not really needed because .atomic_update > > can do the disable too, so drop the duplicate code > > > > Signed-off-by: Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com> > > It looks like these fixes should be in separate patches. Is there any > reason it's not the case? Bullet points just describe the resulting effect/benefits of the change to fix the pipe control register update issue (see the referenced e-mail). I can maybe split off the first bullet point into a separate patch. But I can't guarantee it will not make the original issue worse, because it might have been hiding the other issue with register updates. The rest is just a result of the single logical change. It doesn't work individually, it all has the goal of fixing the issue as a whole. If I were to split it I would have to actually re-implement .atomic_disable callback only to remove it in the next patch. I don't see the benefit. regards, o. > Maxime
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Ondřej Jirman" <megous@megous.com> To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: sun8i-ui/vi: Fix layer zpos change/atomic modesetting Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:23:09 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190918152309.j2dbu63jaru6jn2t@core.my.home> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190918141734.kerdbbaynwutrxf6@gilmour> Hi, On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 04:17:34PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 12:03:37AM +0200, megous@megous.com wrote: > > From: Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com> > > > > There are various issues that this re-work of sun8i_[uv]i_layer_enable > > function fixes: > > > > - Make sure that we re-initialize zpos on reset > > - Minimize register updates by doing them only when state changes > > - Fix issue where DE pipe might get disabled even if it is no longer > > used by the layer that's currently calling sun8i_ui_layer_enable > > - .atomic_disable callback is not really needed because .atomic_update > > can do the disable too, so drop the duplicate code > > > > Signed-off-by: Ondrej Jirman <megous@megous.com> > > It looks like these fixes should be in separate patches. Is there any > reason it's not the case? Bullet points just describe the resulting effect/benefits of the change to fix the pipe control register update issue (see the referenced e-mail). I can maybe split off the first bullet point into a separate patch. But I can't guarantee it will not make the original issue worse, because it might have been hiding the other issue with register updates. The rest is just a result of the single logical change. It doesn't work individually, it all has the goal of fixing the issue as a whole. If I were to split it I would have to actually re-implement .atomic_disable callback only to remove it in the next patch. I don't see the benefit. regards, o. > Maxime _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-18 15:23 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-09-14 22:03 [PATCH] drm: sun8i-ui/vi: Fix layer zpos change/atomic modesetting megous 2019-09-14 22:03 ` megous 2019-09-14 22:15 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-14 22:15 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-18 14:17 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-18 14:17 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-18 15:23 ` Ondřej Jirman [this message] 2019-09-18 15:23 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-18 20:16 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-18 20:16 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-19 12:20 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-19 12:20 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-19 13:12 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-19 13:12 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-20 15:11 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-20 15:11 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-09-24 12:40 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-24 12:40 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-30 15:59 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-09-30 15:59 ` Ondřej Jirman 2019-10-03 11:38 ` Maxime Ripard 2019-10-03 11:38 ` Maxime Ripard
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20190918152309.j2dbu63jaru6jn2t@core.my.home \ --to=megous@megous.com \ --cc=airlied@linux.ie \ --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \ --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mripard@kernel.org \ --cc=wens@csie.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.