linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 11/15] drm/atomic-helper: Set fence deadline for vblank

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 17:12:42 +0200
From:   Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
        Christian König 
        <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
        Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com>,
        Luben Tuikov <luben.tuikov@....com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 11/15] drm/atomic-helper: Set fence deadline for vblank

On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 03:53:33PM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> 
> For an atomic commit updating a single CRTC (ie. a pageflip) calculate
> the next vblank time, and inform the fence(s) of that deadline.
> 
> v2: Comment typo fix (danvet)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
> index d579fd8f7cb8..d8ee98ce2fc5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
> @@ -1511,6 +1511,40 @@ void drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_enables(struct drm_device *dev,
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_enables);
>  
> +/*
> + * For atomic updates which touch just a single CRTC, calculate the time of the
> + * next vblank, and inform all the fences of the deadline.
> + */
> +static void set_fence_deadline(struct drm_device *dev,
> +			       struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> +{
> +	struct drm_crtc *crtc, *wait_crtc = NULL;
> +	struct drm_crtc_state *new_crtc_state;
> +	struct drm_plane *plane;
> +	struct drm_plane_state *new_plane_state;
> +	ktime_t vbltime;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	for_each_new_crtc_in_state (state, crtc, new_crtc_state, i) {
> +		if (wait_crtc)
> +			return;
> +		wait_crtc = crtc;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* If no CRTCs updated, then nothing to do: */
> +	if (!wait_crtc)
> +		return;

Is there an actual point in limiting this to single crtc updates?
That immediately excludes tiled displays/etc.

Handling an arbitrary number of crtcs shouldn't really be a lot
more complicated should it?

> +
> +	if (drm_crtc_next_vblank_start(wait_crtc, &vbltime))
> +		return;
> +
> +	for_each_new_plane_in_state (state, plane, new_plane_state, i) {
> +		if (!new_plane_state->fence)
> +			continue;
> +		dma_fence_set_deadline(new_plane_state->fence, vbltime);
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * drm_atomic_helper_wait_for_fences - wait for fences stashed in plane state
>   * @dev: DRM device
> @@ -1540,6 +1574,8 @@ int drm_atomic_helper_wait_for_fences(struct drm_device *dev,
>  	struct drm_plane_state *new_plane_state;
>  	int i, ret;
>  
> +	set_fence_deadline(dev, state);
> +
>  	for_each_new_plane_in_state(state, plane, new_plane_state, i) {
>  		if (!new_plane_state->fence)
>  			continue;
> -- 
> 2.39.1

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel