From: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com --- drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; }
- if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { int i = 0; struct drm_crtc *crtc_p;
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; }
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) {
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) {
I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be:
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) {
Alex
int i = 0; struct drm_crtc *crtc_p;-- 1.7.11.7
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher alexdeucher@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; }
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) {
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) {I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be:
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) {
Yeah i considered that too.
Cheers, Jerome
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher alexdeucher@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; }
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) {
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) {I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be:
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) {
Actually, the two patches are identical since: #define ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev) ((rdev->family >= CHIP_ARUBA)) but I think the DCE6 variant is clearer. Once I verify with the hw team I'll add the patch with that change.
Thanks!
Alex
Alex
int i = 0; struct drm_crtc *crtc_p;-- 1.7.11.7
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Alex Deucher alexdeucher@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher alexdeucher@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; }
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) {
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) {I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be:
if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) {
Actually, the two patches are identical since: #define ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev) ((rdev->family >= CHIP_ARUBA)) but I think the DCE6 variant is clearer. Once I verify with the hw team I'll add the patch with that change.
Thanks!
Alex
Yes they are identical, i meant that i considered doing it that way but i did not have strong feeling. :)
Cheers, Jerome
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Alex Deucher -
j.glisse＠gmail.com -
Jerome Glisse