On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 09:27:20AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 07:21:34PM +0300, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com
> wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä
> >
> > If we couldn't get a high precisions vblank timestamp, we currently
> > store a zeroed timestamp instead and ass
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 07:21:34PM +0300, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com
wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä
>
> If we couldn't get a high precisions vblank timestamp, we currently
> store a zeroed timestamp instead and assume the next vblank irq to
> get us something better. This makes sense when
From: Ville Syrjälä
If we couldn't get a high precisions vblank timestamp, we currently
store a zeroed timestamp instead and assume the next vblank irq to
get us something better. This makes sense when trying to update the
timestamp from eg. vblank enable. But if we do this from the vblank
irq