On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:13:53AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Tuesday 18 Oct 2016 09:36:23 Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:38:05AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Friday 22 Jul 2016 16:43:13 ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > > >> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> > > >> > > >> Now that all drivers have been converted over to the per-plane rotation > > >> property, we can just nuke the global rotation property. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> > > > > > > Stupid question, but how does this work when the hardware supports global > > > rotation only, not per-plane rotation ? > > > > Does that exist? If so I guess we get to add a rotation property to CRTCS > > (and update docs and all that). > > I have a hardware composer that performs rotation on the output side. At the > moment it doesn't support rotation when used with the display, but I wouldn't > rule that out in future SoC versions. So I'm not aware of any use case for a > rotation property on the CRTC at the moment, I just wanted to make sure we > have a path forward.
I even implemented that for i915 long ago by having it rotate all the planes (+ adjust their coordinates appropriately). But people weren't too keen on putting that in, so I dropped it. https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2014-February/040053.html The only bigger snafu here is omap, which already has a rotation property on the crtc, except it actually only rotates the primary plane. So when/if someone adds a real crtc rotation property it has to be called something else that "rotation". I think I settled on "crtc-rotation" judging what I have in my last branch on that topic. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
