[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1512485269.4977.131.camel@synopsys.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 14:47:50 +0000
From: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>
To: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>
CC: "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"airlied@...il.com" <airlied@...il.com>,
"airlied@...hat.com" <airlied@...hat.com>,
"daniel.vetter@...ll.ch" <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
"l.stach@...gutronix.de" <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: xf86-video-armada via UDL [was: Re: UDL's fbdev doesn't work
for user-space apps]
Hi Jose,
On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 12:26 +0000, Jose Abreu wrote:
> On 05-12-2017 11:53, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> >
> >
> > From my note above about udl_drm_gem_mmap() being only used in case of Xserver
> > I barely may conclude anything. Given my lack of knowledge of DRM guts
> > especially
> > when it comes to complicated cases with DMA buffer exports/imports I cannot say
> > immediately if that's just improper implementation of
> > udl_drm_gem_mmap() or not.
> > Even though I do see some differences between implementation of file_operations->mmap()
> > callback in UDL and
> > say exynos_drm_gem_mmap() or qxl_mmap() it's not clear
> > why this and that implementation was done.
>
> Oh, I've seen this before. This is the same thing that arcpgu
> used to do in the mmap callback! Please comment out the call to
> update_vm_cache_attr() in the mmap callback and check if it works.
Actually I did it as the first thing when I spotted it in udl_drm_gem_mmap().
But that made no difference at all :(
-Alexey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists