Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-03-02 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
IRC acked by Harry Wentland " dhnkrn, the patch for driver-private atomic state object makes sense to me. Didn't realize that's the same one from early February. Feel free to add my Acked-by" -DK On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 22:38 -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > It is necessary to track states fo

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-27 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:57 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:01:12AM +, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 15:37 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > > > > > > On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Arc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-26 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:01:12AM +, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 15:37 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > > > > On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > > > On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > > >> Comparing this func to > > >> drm_atomic

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-22 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 09:59 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > > On 02/22/2017 05:31 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 15:37 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > >> > >> On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-21 Thread Archit Taneja
On 02/22/2017 05:31 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 15:37 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: Hi, On 02/09/2017 12:08 PM, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: It is necessary to

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-21 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
On Fri, 2017-02-17 at 15:37 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > > On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 02/09/2017 12:08 PM, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > >>> It is necessary to track states for objects other

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-17 Thread Archit Taneja
On 02/16/2017 05:43 AM, Pandiyan, Dhinakaran wrote: On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: Hi, On 02/09/2017 12:08 PM, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: It is necessary to track states for objects other than connector, crtc and plane for atomic modesets. But adding objects like DP

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-15 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:53 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote: > Hi, > > On 02/09/2017 12:08 PM, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > > It is necessary to track states for objects other than connector, crtc > > and plane for atomic modesets. But adding objects like DP MST link > > bandwidth to drm_atomic_state w

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-09 Thread Pandiyan, Dhinakaran
On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 08:08 +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 10:38:07PM -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > > +#define for_each_private_obj(__state, obj_funcs, obj, obj_state, __i, > > __funcs) \ > > + for ((__i) = 0; \ > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 4/8] drm: Add driver-private objects to atomic state

2017-02-09 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 10:38:07PM -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > +#define for_each_private_obj(__state, obj_funcs, obj, obj_state, __i, > __funcs) \ > + for ((__i) = 0; \ > + (__i) < (__state)->num_private_objs &&