[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:05:29AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: > >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something > >> along these lines: > >> > >> - We

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark > >> wrote: > >> > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank event

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also > > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so I'd propose > > that however we go about pageflip (one supe

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: > I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something > along these lines: > > - We use properties for specifying what to change to be future > compatible with new crtc features, but also to allow exposing > hw-spe

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: >> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote:

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:05:29AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: >> >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: >> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:05:29AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: >> >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark >> >> wr

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: >> > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also >> > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian H?gsberg wrote: >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something >> along these lines: >> >> - We use properties for specifying what to change to be future >> compatibl

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:05:29AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: > >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something > >> along these lines: > >> > >> - We

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:07:02AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > >> > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: >> > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also >> > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: >> I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something >> along these lines: >> >> - We use properties for specifying what to change to be future >> compatibl

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:12:35PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also > > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so I'd propose > > that however we go about pageflip (one supe

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:46:35PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: > I think (hope) the consensus coming out of this thread is something > along these lines: > > - We use properties for specifying what to change to be future > compatible with new crtc features, but also to allow exposing > hw-spe

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 > Ville Syrjälä wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> > wrote: >> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:34:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so I'd propose > that however we go about pageflip (one super-ioctl, or one per crtc), > we could use the atomic-modeset ioctl

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Rob Clark wrote: > note that the test phase doesn't need vblank events, and also > shouldn't -EBUSY if there is still a pending flip[*], so I'd propose > that however we go about pageflip (one super-ioctl, or one per crtc), > we could use the atomic-modeset ioctl

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 > Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> > wrote: >> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:34:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >>

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 > Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> > wrote: >> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:34:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrjälä >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 > Ville Syrjälä wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> > wrote: >> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > > >> But I think we could still do this w/ one i

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:58:31 +0300 Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > > >> But I think we could still do this w/ one i

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:34:59PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrjälä >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29:04AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> >

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 09:45:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 08:25:53AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:35:59AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clar

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> >>

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:39:54AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clar

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:40:56PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> But I think we could still do this w/ one ioctl per crtc for > >> atomic-pageflip. > > > > We could, if we wan

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > >> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrj?l? > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > >> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > >> > Rob Clark

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> But I think we could still do this w/ one ioctl pe

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrjälä >>

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> But I think we could still do this w/ one ioctl pe

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > > Rob Clark wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > >> > From: Rob Clark > >> > > >> > This is following a bit th

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:19PM -0500, Clark, Rob wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> But I think we could still do this w/ one ioctl per crtc for > >> atomic-pageflip. > > > > We could, if we wan

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:48:16AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Ro

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> >>

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrj?l? >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrjälä >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:23:48AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> >

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:42:27AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:43AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrj?l? wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 >> > Rob Clark wrote: >> > >> >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark >> >> wr

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrjälä >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 07:30:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrjälä > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > >> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > >> > Rob Clark

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 >> > Rob Clark wrote: >> > >> >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >>

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > > Rob Clark wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > >> > From: Rob Clark > >> > > >> > This is following a bit th

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> > From: Rob Clark >> > >> > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- >> > modeset, in that it is swi

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 > Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> > From: Rob Clark >> > >> > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- >> > modeset, in that it is swi

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 Rob Clark wrote: > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > > From: Rob Clark > > > > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- > > modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. > > The advantag

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500 Rob Clark wrote: > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > > From: Rob Clark > > > > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- > > modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. > > The advantag

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > From: Rob Clark > > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- > modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. > The advantage of this approach is that it makes it easier to add new > attrib

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

From: Rob Clark This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. The advantage of this approach is that it makes it easier to add new attributes to set as part of a page-flip (and even opens the option

Re: [RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > From: Rob Clark > > This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- > modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. > The advantage of this approach is that it makes it easier to add new > attrib

[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

From: Rob Clark This is following a bit the approach that Ville is taking for atomic- modeset, in that it is switching over to using properties for everything. The advantage of this approach is that it makes it easier to add new attributes to set as part of a page-flip (and even opens the option