On 04/14/2015 08:36 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 08:22:20PM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
>> On 04/05/2015 05:40 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> Avoid adding to the waitqueue and reprobing the current vblank if the
>>> caller is only querying the current vblank sequence and timestamp and
>>> so we would return immediately.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch>
>>> Cc: Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net>
>>> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com>
>>> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com>,
>>> Cc: Mario Kleiner <mario.kleiner.de at gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
>>> index 6f5dc18779e2..ba80b51b4b00 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
>>> @@ -1617,14 +1617,16 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, void
>>> *data,
>>> vblwait->request.sequence = seq + 1;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - DRM_DEBUG("waiting on vblank count %d, crtc %d\n",
>>> - vblwait->request.sequence, crtc);
>>> - vblank->last_wait = vblwait->request.sequence;
>>> - DRM_WAIT_ON(ret, vblank->queue, 3 * HZ,
>>> - (((drm_vblank_count(dev, crtc) -
>>> - vblwait->request.sequence) <= (1 << 23)) ||
>>> - !vblank->enabled ||
>>> - !dev->irq_enabled));
>>> + if (vblwait->request.sequence != seq) {
>>> + DRM_DEBUG("waiting on vblank count %d, crtc %d\n",
>>> + vblwait->request.sequence, crtc);
>>> + vblank->last_wait = vblwait->request.sequence;
>>> + DRM_WAIT_ON(ret, vblank->queue, 3 * HZ,
>>> + (((drm_vblank_count(dev, crtc) -
>>> + vblwait->request.sequence) <= (1 << 23)) ||
>>> + !vblank->enabled ||
>>> + !dev->irq_enabled));
>>> + }
>>>
>>> if (ret != -EINTR) {
>>> struct timeval now;
>>>
>>
>> It would be good to have some DRM_DEBUG output for the skip-the-wait
>> case as well, so one can still follow from dmesg output when a
>> client does a drmWaitVblank call even if it is only a query.
>
> We still have DRM_DEBUG("returning %d to client"), as well as the
> drmIoctl:DRM_DEBUG(ioctl->name), is that not sufficient?
> -Chris
>
Oh right, that's good enough. Maybe add "on crtc %d" to that DRM_DEBUG,
to make it unambiguous for which crtc some count is returned?
-mario
