On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:05:53AM +0530, sonika wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 13 January 2015 07:02 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 06:03:39PM +0530, Sonika Jindal wrote:
> >> Taking rotation into account while checking the plane
> >> and adjusting the sizes accordingly.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jin...@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane_helper.c | 79
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >> include/drm/drm_plane_helper.h | 3 +-
> >> 2 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane_helper.c
> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane_helper.c
> >> index f24c4cf..4badd69 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane_helper.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane_helper.c
> >> @@ -138,9 +138,13 @@ int drm_plane_helper_check_update(struct drm_plane
> >> *plane,
> >> int max_scale,
> >> bool can_position,
> >> bool can_update_disabled,
> >> - bool *visible)
> >> + bool *visible,
> >> + unsigned int rotation)
> >> {
> >> int hscale, vscale;
> >> + int crtc_x, crtc_y;
> >> + unsigned int crtc_w, crtc_h;
> >> + uint32_t src_x, src_y, src_w, src_h;
> >>
> >> if (!fb) {
> >> *visible = false;
> >> @@ -158,9 +162,13 @@ int drm_plane_helper_check_update(struct drm_plane
> >> *plane,
> >> return -EINVAL;
> >> }
> >>
> >> + if (fb)
> >> + drm_rect_rotate(src, fb->width << 16, fb->height << 16,
> >> + rotation);
> >> +
> >> /* Check scaling */
> >> - hscale = drm_rect_calc_hscale(src, dest, min_scale, max_scale);
> >> - vscale = drm_rect_calc_vscale(src, dest, min_scale, max_scale);
> >> + hscale = drm_rect_calc_hscale_relaxed(src, dest, min_scale, max_scale);
> >> + vscale = drm_rect_calc_vscale_relaxed(src, dest, min_scale, max_scale);
> > This is an unrelated change. Relaxed scaling allows the the src/dest
> > rectangles to be reduced in size in order to keep the scaling ration
> > within the min/max range. I suppose we should switch to using it to
> > make the behaviour uniform across drivers, but definitely should be
> > done with a separate patch.
> Since, I added drm_rect_rotate before this, it changes the src sizes and
> it was giving me
> Invalid scaling if we don't let the sizes to be changed using _relaxed
> functions. I am trying this
> for 90/270 rotation.
That would indicate a bug somewhere. Pontetially the bug could be in
whatever test you're using as well.
> I can move it to a separate patch if required.
We nee to figure out why you got the error first.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
