[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 9/9] drm/i915: Add rotation property for sprites

[Imre Deak]

On Mon, 2013-10-14 at 17:39 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:59:13PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-09-30 at 17:44 +0300, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com wrote:
> > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Sprite planes support 180 degree rotation. The lower layers are now in
> > > place, so hook in the standard rotation property to expose the feature
> > > to the users.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h     |  1 +
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >  2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > index 08e96a8..48d4d5f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > > @@ -1356,6 +1356,7 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_private {
> > >  
> > >  	struct drm_property *broadcast_rgb_property;
> > >  	struct drm_property *force_audio_property;
> > > +	struct drm_property *rotation_property;
> > >  
> > >  	bool hw_contexts_disabled;
> > >  	uint32_t hw_context_size;
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> > > index 028a979..49f8238 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> > > @@ -1033,6 +1033,30 @@ out_unlock:
> > >  	return ret;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static int intel_plane_set_property(struct drm_plane *plane,
> > > +				    struct drm_property *prop,
> > > +				    uint64_t val)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = plane->dev->dev_private;
> > > +	struct intel_plane *intel_plane = to_intel_plane(plane);
> > > +	uint64_t old_val;
> > > +	int ret = -ENOENT;
> > > +
> > > +	if (prop == dev_priv->rotation_property) {
> > > +		/* exactly one rotation angle please */
> > > +		if (hweight32(val & 0xf) != 1)
> > > +			return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > +		old_val = intel_plane->rotation;
> > > +		intel_plane->rotation = val;
> > > +		ret = intel_plane_restore(plane);
> > > +		if (ret)
> > > +			intel_plane->rotation = old_val;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  int intel_plane_restore(struct drm_plane *plane)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct intel_plane *intel_plane = to_intel_plane(plane);
> > > @@ -1059,6 +1083,7 @@ static const struct drm_plane_funcs intel_plane_funcs = {
> > >  	.update_plane = intel_update_plane,
> > >  	.disable_plane = intel_disable_plane,
> > >  	.destroy = intel_destroy_plane,
> > > +	.set_property = intel_plane_set_property,
> > >  };
> > >  
> > >  static uint32_t ilk_plane_formats[] = {
> > > @@ -1095,6 +1120,7 @@ static uint32_t vlv_plane_formats[] = {
> > >  int
> > >  intel_plane_init(struct drm_device *dev, enum pipe pipe, int plane)
> > >  {
> > > +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> > >  	struct intel_plane *intel_plane;
> > >  	unsigned long possible_crtcs;
> > >  	const uint32_t *plane_formats;
> > > @@ -1168,8 +1194,22 @@ intel_plane_init(struct drm_device *dev, enum pipe pipe, int plane)
> > >  			     &intel_plane_funcs,
> > >  			     plane_formats, num_plane_formats,
> > >  			     false);
> > > -	if (ret)
> > > +	if (ret) {
> > >  		kfree(intel_plane);
> > > +		goto out;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	if (!dev_priv->rotation_property)
> > > +		dev_priv->rotation_property =
> > > +			drm_mode_create_rotation_property(dev,
> > > +							  BIT(DRM_ROTATE_0) |
> > > +							  BIT(DRM_ROTATE_180));
> > > +
> > > +	if (dev_priv->rotation_property)
> > > +		drm_object_attach_property(&intel_plane->base.base,
> > > +					   dev_priv->rotation_property,
> > > +					   intel_plane->rotation);
> > 
> > drm_mode_create_rotation_property() can fail silently, I think we should
> > handle it.
> 
> I figured I'd just move it to intel_modeset_init() but turns out we
> don't really handle errors there either. Frankly this looks like
> another rathole. Seeing as we already ignore property creation errors
> in other places (in a way that could oops even), I'm just going to
> run away before the urge to fix it all takes over.

Ok, since properties are already unreliable in this sense, I'm fine with
leaving this as-is for now. The series looks ok, so:

Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20131014/eb672e44/attachment.sig>