On 10/02/2018 05:15 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:35:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
The core _does_ the call to drm_atomic_commit for you. That's pretty much the entire point of having the fancy new atomic_set/get_prop callbacks.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch Cc: VMware Graphics linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com Cc: Sinclair Yeh syeh@vmware.com Cc: Thomas Hellstrom thellstrom@vmware.com
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 6 ------ 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c index 292e48feba83..049bd50eea87 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c @@ -2311,12 +2311,6 @@ vmw_du_connector_atomic_set_property(struct drm_connector *connector,
if (property == dev_priv->implicit_placement_property) { vcs->is_implicit = val;
/** We should really be doing a drm_atomic_commit() to* commit the new state, but since this doesn't cause* an immedate state change, this is probably ok*/Maybe the comment is referring to delaying the du->is_implicit assignment to commit time? Otherwise a TEST_ONLY/failed commit will clobber this.
The is_implicit property is made read-only in a vmwgfx recent commit. Not sure exactly where it ended up, though. (-fixes, -next or -limbo). Need to take a look.
Hmm. There's both .set_property() and .atomic_set_property() in there. I wonder what that's about.
Probably a leftover. I take it .set_property() is not needed when we have .atomic_set_property()?
/Thomas
} else { return -EINVAL; -- 2.19.0.rc2
Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freed...