linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 17/25] drm/msm/dpu: Fail atomic

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]

Message-ID: <klngsvbaqycfye6bobeq3krvkttno6n6y4qnidoobdobgxfeln@fkzpellmdjlk>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 01:59:01 +0200
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, 
	Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, 
	Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, 
	quic_ebharadw@...cinc.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, 
	freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>, 
	Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 17/25] drm/msm/dpu: Fail atomic_check if CWB and CDM
 are enabled

On Thu, Dec 26, 2024 at 02:51:12PM -0800, Jessica Zhang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/19/2024 9:44 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 04:43:28PM -0800, Jessica Zhang wrote:
> > > We cannot support both CWB and CDM simultaneously as this would require
> > > 2 CDM blocks and currently our hardware only supports 1 CDM block at
> > > most.
> > 
> > Why would CWB require a second CDM block? I think that YUV output over
> > DP (needs_cdm = true) and RGB output over WB (cwb_enabled = true) should
> > work. Am I wrong?
> 
> Hey Dmitry,
> 
> No, I think your usecase should work. In that case, I can change this so
> that it only fails if both DP and WB are requesting CDM simultaneously.

Sounds good to me, thank you!.


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry