[RFC 0/9] nuclear pageflip

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:07:49PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 22:19:59 -0500
> > Rob Clark <rob at ti.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Rob Clark <rob.clark at linaro.org> wrote:
> >> > From: Rob Clark <rob at ti.com>
> >> >
> >> > 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 to
> >> > add new object types).
> >>
> >> oh, and for those wondering what the hell this is all about,
> >> nuclear-pageflip is a pageflip that atomically updates the CRTC layer
> >> and zero or more attached plane layers, optionally changing various
> >> properties such as z-order (or even blending modes, etc) atomically.
> >> It includes the option for a test step so userspace compositor can
> >> test a proposed configuration (if any properties not marked as
> >> 'dynamic' are updated).  This intended to allow, for example, weston
> >> compositor to synchronize updates to plane (sprite) layers with CRTC
> >> layer.
> >>
> >
> > Can we please name this something different? I complained about this in
> > IRC, but I don't know if you hang around in #intel-gfx.
> >
> > Some suggestions:
> > multiplane pageflip
> > muliplane atomic pageflip
> > atomic multiplane pageflip
> > atomic multiflip
> > pageflip of atomic and multiplane nature
> >
> > Nuclear is not at all descriptive and requires as your response shows
> > :-)
> >
> 
> fair enough.. I was originally calling it atomic-pageflip until
> someone (I don't remember who) started calling it nuclear-pageflip to
> differentiate from atomic-modeset.  But IMO we could just call the two
> ioclts atomic-modeset and atomic-pageflip.  (Or even modeset2 and
> pageflip2, but that seems much more boring)

My plan has been to use the same ioctl for both uses. They'll need
nearly identical handling anyway on the ioctl level. I have something
semi-working currently, but I need to clean it up a bit before I can
show it to anyone.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC