| Message ID | 9090c1b423e0b56c8e906155fe53ff0841830a03.1689252746.git.geert@linux-m68k.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm: fb-helper/ssd130x: Add support for DRM_FORMAT_R1 | expand |
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> writes: > Currently drm_client_buffer_addfb() uses the legacy drm_mode_addfb(), > which uses bpp and depth to guess the wanted buffer format. > However, drm_client_buffer_addfb() already knows the exact buffer > format, so there is no need to convert back and forth between buffer > format and bpp/depth, and the function can just call drm_mode_addfb2() > directly instead. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c | 13 +++++-------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > Nice cleanup! Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
On Thursday, July 13th, 2023 at 15:17, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > Currently drm_client_buffer_addfb() uses the legacy drm_mode_addfb(), > which uses bpp and depth to guess the wanted buffer format. > However, drm_client_buffer_addfb() already knows the exact buffer > format, so there is no need to convert back and forth between buffer > format and bpp/depth, and the function can just call drm_mode_addfb2() > directly instead. By any chance, is the commit message wrong? The title refers to drm_mode_create_dumb(), but the description and code refer to drm_client_buffer_addfb().
Hi Simon, On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 1:01 PM Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr> wrote: > On Thursday, July 13th, 2023 at 15:17, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Currently drm_client_buffer_addfb() uses the legacy drm_mode_addfb(), > > which uses bpp and depth to guess the wanted buffer format. > > However, drm_client_buffer_addfb() already knows the exact buffer > > format, so there is no need to convert back and forth between buffer > > format and bpp/depth, and the function can just call drm_mode_addfb2() > > directly instead. > > By any chance, is the commit message wrong? The title refers to > drm_mode_create_dumb(), but the description and code refer to > drm_client_buffer_addfb(). Yes it is, thanks. Originally, I had copied-and-pasted the wrong function name. I thought I had fixed all references, but apparently I missed the one-line summary :-( Will fix in v2. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c index f6292ba0e6fc3783..de660a25ad7c6f06 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c @@ -374,19 +374,16 @@ static int drm_client_buffer_addfb(struct drm_client_buffer *buffer, u32 handle) { struct drm_client_dev *client = buffer->client; - struct drm_mode_fb_cmd fb_req = { }; - const struct drm_format_info *info; + struct drm_mode_fb_cmd2 fb_req = { }; int ret; - info = drm_format_info(format); - fb_req.bpp = drm_format_info_bpp(info, 0); - fb_req.depth = info->depth; fb_req.width = width; fb_req.height = height; - fb_req.handle = handle; - fb_req.pitch = buffer->pitch; + fb_req.pixel_format = format; + fb_req.handles[0] = handle; + fb_req.pitches[0] = buffer->pitch; - ret = drm_mode_addfb(client->dev, &fb_req, client->file); + ret = drm_mode_addfb2(client->dev, &fb_req, client->file); if (ret) return ret;
Currently drm_client_buffer_addfb() uses the legacy drm_mode_addfb(), which uses bpp and depth to guess the wanted buffer format. However, drm_client_buffer_addfb() already knows the exact buffer format, so there is no need to convert back and forth between buffer format and bpp/depth, and the function can just call drm_mode_addfb2() directly instead. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c | 13 +++++-------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)