On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 04:10:39PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 09:02:35PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:42:00PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 07:08:55PM +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com>
> > > >
> > > > As armada isn't an atomic driver trying to pass a non-populated
> > > > crtc->state to drm_atomic_helper_check_plane_state() will end in tears.
> > > > Construct a temporary crtc state a la drm_plane_helper_check_update()
> > > > and pass that instead. For now we just really need crtc_state->enable
> > > > to be there.
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to solve this by having the atomic state setup
> > > for non-atomic drivers instead, so we're not unwinding some of the
> > > work that's already been done to try and convert drivers /to/
> > > atomic modeset?
> > Dunno. Feels like a wasted effort adding more code that'll just get
> > ripped out as soon as the atomic conversion happens. And I'd rather
> > not have to worry about potentially stale states hanging around, in
> > case you forgot to update something somewhere.
> > In any case, I don't think this is unwinding anything. Once you have
> > the atomic conversion done sufficiently you can just drop these
> > temporary states. We already have the temp state for the plane here
> > anyway, and pairing that with a crtc state seems rather logical.
> So yea or nay on these armada patches?
Also cc:ing Lucas since apparently armada is somehow related to
I have my doubts about the current code working at all (due to
the conflict resolution between my refactoring and rmk's work).
dri-devel mailing list