linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/display: Fix set scaling doesn's work

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <789c2c61-4959-c3c1-0916-d1cc7f659247@amd.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jan 2023 10:58:16 -0500
From:   Rodrigo Siqueira Jordao <Rodrigo.Siqueira@....com>
To:     harry.wentland@....com, nicholas.kazlauskas@....com,
        hongao <hongao@...ontech.com>
Cc:     amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        sunpeng.li@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        alexander.deucher@....com, christian.koenig@....com,
        Xinhui.Pan@....com, airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch,
        aurabindo.pillai@....com, roman.li@....com, Jerry.Zuo@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/display: Fix set scaling doesn's work



On 11/22/22 06:20, hongao wrote:
> [Why]
> Setting scaling does not correctly update CRTC state. As a result
> dc stream state's src (composition area) && dest (addressable area)
> was not calculated as expected. This causes set scaling doesn's work.
> 
> [How]
> Correctly update CRTC state when setting scaling property.
> 
> Signed-off-by: hongao <hongao@...ontech.com>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> index 3e1ecca72430..a88a6f758748 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> @@ -9386,8 +9386,8 @@ static int amdgpu_dm_atomic_check(struct drm_device *dev,
>   			goto fail;
>   		}
>   
> -		if (dm_old_con_state->abm_level !=
> -		    dm_new_con_state->abm_level)
> +		if (dm_old_con_state->abm_level != dm_new_con_state->abm_level ||
> +		    dm_old_con_state->scaling != dm_new_con_state->scaling)
>   			new_crtc_state->connectors_changed = true;
>   	}
>   

Hi,

This change lgtm, and I also run it in our CI, and from IGT perspective, 
we are good.

Harry, do you have any comment about this change?

Thanks
Siqueira