On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:35:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> The core _does_ the call to drm_atomic_commit for you. That's pretty
> much the entire point of having the fancy new atomic_set/get_prop
> callbacks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>
> Cc: VMware Graphics <[email protected]>
> Cc: Sinclair Yeh <[email protected]>
> Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c
> index 292e48feba83..049bd50eea87 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c
> @@ -2311,12 +2311,6 @@ vmw_du_connector_atomic_set_property(struct
> drm_connector *connector,
>
> if (property == dev_priv->implicit_placement_property) {
> vcs->is_implicit = val;
> -
> - /*
> - * We should really be doing a drm_atomic_commit() to
> - * commit the new state, but since this doesn't cause
> - * an immedate state change, this is probably ok
> - */
> du->is_implicit = vcs->is_implicit;
Maybe the comment is referring to delaying the du->is_implicit
assignment to commit time? Otherwise a TEST_ONLY/failed commit
will clobber this.
Hmm. There's both .set_property() and .atomic_set_property()
in there. I wonder what that's about.
> } else {
> return -EINVAL;
> --
> 2.19.0.rc2
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
