Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-10 Thread Simona Vetter
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 08:34:28PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 06:24:16PM +0100, Simona Vetter wrote: > > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > > that's a big no-no: > > > > - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all t

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-10 Thread Simona Vetter
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 03:45:53PM +, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 15:30, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On 2025-01-08 18:22, Simona Vetter wrote: > > > Maybe I'm wrong, but my understanding is that English generally doesn't do > > > compound words connected with dashes, you

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-09 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Hi Am 09.01.25 um 16:45 schrieb Daniel Stone: Hi, On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 15:30, Michel Dänzer wrote: On 2025-01-08 18:22, Simona Vetter wrote: Maybe I'm wrong, but my understanding is that English generally doesn't do compound words connected with dashes, you just line them up with spaces.

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-09 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi, On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 15:30, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On 2025-01-08 18:22, Simona Vetter wrote: > > Maybe I'm wrong, but my understanding is that English generally doesn't do > > compound words connected with dashes, you just line them up with spaces. > > I hope you don't mind me jumping in, th

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-09 Thread Michel Dänzer
On 2025-01-08 18:22, Simona Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:53:14PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > >> Comments on the text from a non-native speaker: >> >>> +* >>> +* - Drivers must not consult @allow_modeset in the atomic commit path, >> >> 'atomic-commit' because it's the c

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-08 Thread Dmitry Baryshkov
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 06:24:16PM +0100, Simona Vetter wrote: > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > that's a big no-no: > > - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these > crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be

[PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-08 Thread Simona Vetter
msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and that's a big no-no: - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be the case, and is breaking uapi - further even if the ctm change itsel

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-08 Thread Simona Vetter
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:53:14PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > Am 11.10.23 um 11:20 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > > Can you give context or pointers here? See Dmitry's enforcement patch set he just sent out. Also fin

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2025-01-08 Thread Simona Vetter
On Sun, Dec 22, 2024 at 06:47:18AM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 12:20, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > > that's a big no-no: > > > > - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on a

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2024-12-21 Thread Dmitry Baryshkov
Hello, On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 12:20, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > that's a big no-no: > > - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these > crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be >

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2023-10-11 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:20:51 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote: > msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and > that's a big no-no: > > - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these > crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be >

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Hi Am 11.10.23 um 11:20 schrieb Daniel Vetter: msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and Can you give context or pointers here? that's a big no-no: - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpe

[PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2023-10-11 Thread Daniel Vetter
msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and that's a big no-no: - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be the case, and is breaking uapi - further even if the ctm change itsel

[PATCH] drm/atomic: clarify the rules around drm_atomic_state->allow_modeset

2023-10-10 Thread Daniel Vetter
msm is automagically upgrading normal commits to full modesets, and that's a big no-no: - for one this results in full on->off->on transitions on all these crtc, at least if you're using the usual helpers. Which seems to be the case, and is breaking uapi - further even if the ctm change itsel