[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <zitno3p7tbnld5auedkx5g4wey2csng4ncmtdhzinbuhblunyk@chnwsnsgq36v>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 10:22:27 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] drm/ssd130x: Allocate buffer in the CRTC's
.atomic_check() callback
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 08:25:08AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> The commit 45b58669e532 ("drm/ssd130x: Allocate buffer in the plane's
> .atomic_check() callback") moved the allocation of the intermediate and
> HW buffers from the encoder's .atomic_enable callback to primary plane's
> .atomic_check callback.
>
> This was suggested by Maxime Ripard because drivers aren't allowed to fail
> after drm_atomic_helper_swap_state() has been called, and the encoder's
> .atomic_enable happens after the new atomic state has been swapped.
>
> But that change caused a performance regression in very slow platforms,
> since now the allocation happens for every plane's atomic state commit.
> For example, Geert Uytterhoeven reports that is the case on a VexRiscV
> softcore (RISC-V CPU implementation on an FPGA).
I'd like to have numbers on that. It's a bit surprising to me that,
given how many objects we already allocate during a commit, two small
additional allocations affect performances so dramatically, even on a
slow platform.
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists