Message ID | 1460683781-22535-7-git-send-email-gustavo@padovan.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> wrote: > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> > > This flag tells drm_atomic_ioctl that we want to get a per-crtc out-fence > fd back. > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> > --- > include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > index 7a7856e..39905cc 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > @@ -582,13 +582,15 @@ struct drm_mode_destroy_dumb { > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY 0x0100 > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK 0x0200 > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET 0x0400 > +#define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE 0x0800 > > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_FLAGS (\ > DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT |\ > DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC |\ > DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY |\ > DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK |\ > - DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET) > + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET |\ > + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE) just to be pedantic / bisectable, perhaps this should be squashed in to patch that actually starts using this flag? Otherwise there is an intermediate state in git where the flag is accepted but ignored.. BR, -R > struct drm_mode_atomic { > __u32 flags; > -- > 2.5.5 >
2016-04-14 Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> wrote: > > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> > > > > This flag tells drm_atomic_ioctl that we want to get a per-crtc out-fence > > fd back. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> > > --- > > include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > > index 7a7856e..39905cc 100644 > > --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h > > @@ -582,13 +582,15 @@ struct drm_mode_destroy_dumb { > > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY 0x0100 > > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK 0x0200 > > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET 0x0400 > > +#define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE 0x0800 > > > > #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_FLAGS (\ > > DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT |\ > > DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC |\ > > DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY |\ > > DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK |\ > > - DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET) > > + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET |\ > > + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE) > > just to be pedantic / bisectable, perhaps this should be squashed in > to patch that actually starts using this flag? Otherwise there is an > intermediate state in git where the flag is accepted but ignored.. Sure, I totally agree. Gustavo
diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h index 7a7856e..39905cc 100644 --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h @@ -582,13 +582,15 @@ struct drm_mode_destroy_dumb { #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY 0x0100 #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK 0x0200 #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET 0x0400 +#define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE 0x0800 #define DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_FLAGS (\ DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_EVENT |\ DRM_MODE_PAGE_FLIP_ASYNC |\ DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY |\ DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_NONBLOCK |\ - DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET) + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET |\ + DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_OUT_FENCE) struct drm_mode_atomic { __u32 flags;