[PATCH v2 4/5] drm/tegra: Implement VBLANK support

[Mario Kleiner]

On 22.01.13 19:39, Lucas Stach wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 22.01.2013, 18:37 +0100 schrieb Mario Kleiner:
>> On 14.01.13 17:05, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> Implement support for the VBLANK IOCTL. Note that Tegra is somewhat
>>> special in this case because it doesn't use the generic IRQ support
>>> provided by the DRM core (DRIVER_HAVE_IRQ) but rather registers one
>>> interrupt handler for each display controller.
>>>
>>> While at it, clean up the way that interrupts are enabled to ensure
>>> that the VBLANK interrupt only gets enabled when required.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at avionic-design.de>
>>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>>>    struct drm_driver tegra_drm_driver = {
>>>    	.driver_features = DRIVER_BUS_PLATFORM | DRIVER_MODESET | DRIVER_GEM,
>>>    	.load = tegra_drm_load,
>>> @@ -96,6 +136,10 @@ struct drm_driver tegra_drm_driver = {
>>>    	.open = tegra_drm_open,
>>>    	.lastclose = tegra_drm_lastclose,
>>>
>>> +	.get_vblank_counter = drm_vblank_count,
>>
>> -> .get_vblank_counter = drm_vblank_count is a no-op.
>>
>> .get_vblank_counter() is supposed to return some real hardware vblank
>> counter value to reinitialize the software vblank counter at vbl irq
>> enable time. That software counter gets queried via drm_vblank_count().
>> If you hook this up to drm_vblank_count() it essentially returns a
>> constant, frozen vblank count, it has the same effect as returning zero
>> or any other constant value -- You lose all vblank counter increments
>> during vblank irq off time. The same problem is present in nouveau-kms.
>>
>> I think it would be better to either implement a real hw counter query,
>> or some function with a /* TODO: Implement me properly */ comment which
>> returns zero, so it is clear something is missing here.
>>
> I've looked this up in the TRM a while ago as I know we have the same
> problem in nouveau, but it seems there is no HW vblank counter on Tegra.
>
> Mario, you know a fair bit more about this than I do, what is the
> preferred way of handling this if we are sure we are not able to
> implement anything meaningful here? Just return 0?
>

I think 0 would be better, just to make it clear to readers of the 
source code that this function is basically unimplemented. For 
correctness it doesn't matter what you return, drm_vblank_count() is ok 
as well.

If we wanted, we could probably implement a good enough emulated 
hw-vblank counter, at least on nouveau? If there is some on-chip clock 
register that is driven by the same hardware oscillator as the crtc's so 
it doesn't drift, we could store the clock time in the vblank_disable() 
hook, and some measured duration of a video refresh, wrt. that clock. 
Then in .get_vblank_counter() calculate how many vblanks have elapsed 
from (current_clock_time - vblank_off_clock_time) / frame_duration and 
increment our own private software vblank counter. Something along that 
line...

-mario