On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 10:07 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 16-02-18 om 20:27 schreef Pandiyan, Dhinakaran:
> > On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 08:55 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >> Quoting Dhinakaran Pandiyan (2018-02-16 04:33:21)
> >>> Preparing a framebuffer should not require a flush. _post_plane_update()
> >>> takes care of flushing when a flip is scheduled, this should be
> >>> sufficient for PSR and FBC.
> >> Makes sense.
> >>
> > I also think this might speed up the flips a bit by avoiding flushes.
> >
> >>> Cc: Paulo Zanoni <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <[email protected]>
> >> Also
> >> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]>
> >> to validate the flow through atomic.
> >> -Chris
> >>
> Page flips used to do intel_frontbuffer_flip_prepare here, followed by
> intel_frontbuffer_flip_complete. I think it would make sense to change the
> patch to do that?
>
I have no context why it was removed, I'll have to understand that
change and get back to you.
>
> Then again, seems like frontbuffer tracking should be done per crtc..
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
