msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
work definitions and a list to track events submitted
to the workqueue. We can avoid this redundant list
and its protection mechanism, if we subclass the
work object to encapsulate vblank event parameters.
changes in v2:
- subclass
DPU was using one thread per display to dispatch async commits and
vblank requests. Since clean up already happened in msm to use the
common thread for all the display commits, display threads are only
used to cater vblank requests. Since a single thread is sufficient
to do the job without any
msm is using system wq for dispatching commit and vblank
events. Switch idle power collapse feature also to use
system wq to handle delayed work handlers so that
msm can get rid of redundant display threads.
changes in v2:
- patch introduced in v2
changes in v3:
- none
use kthread_destroy_worker to destroy workers and
release their associated kthreads.
changes in v3:
- introduced in the series
Signed-off-by: Jeykumar Sankaran
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c | 6 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git
Since there are no clients using these threads,
cleaning it up.
changes in v2:
- switch all the dependent clients to use system wq
before removing the disp_threads (Sean Paul)
changes in v3:
- none
Signed-off-by: Jeykumar Sankaran
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c |
On 2018-11-14 21:19, Sean Paul wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:54:32PM +0530, Sravanthi Kollukuduru wrote:
Since the upstream interconnect bus framework has landed
upstream, the existing references of custom bus scaling
needs to be cleaned up.
Just a few nits below.
Sure, will make the
Hey,
I think this patch is ready for inclusion.
Rob.
On 2018-11-05 11:13, Robert Foss wrote:
If dma_fence_wait fails to wait for a supplied in-fence in
msm_ioctl_gem_submit, make sure we release that in-fence.
Also remove this dma_fence_put() from the 'out' label.
Signed-off-by: Robert
On 11/15/2018 12:33 AM, Koenig, Christian wrote:
Am 14.11.18 um 18:29 schrieb Sharat Masetty:
On 11/8/2018 8:11 PM, Koenig, Christian wrote:
Am 08.11.18 um 14:42 schrieb Sharat Masetty:
Hi Christian,
Can you please review this patch? It is a continuation of the
discussion at [1].
At