[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: fix cursor handling when runtime suspended

[Paulo Zanoni]

2014-07-29 7:22 GMT-03:00 Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 03:37:12PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
>> From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
>>
>> If we're runtime suspended and try to use the cursor interfaces, we
>> will get a lot of WARNs saying we did the wrong thing.
>>
>> For intel_crtc_update_cursor(), all we need to do is return if the
>> CRTC is not active, since writing the registers won't really have any
>> effect if the screen is not visible, and we will write the registers
>> later when enabling the screen.
>>
>> For intel_crtc_cursor_set_obj(), we just need to wake up the hardware
>> then pinning the display plane.
>>
>> v2: - Narrow the put/get calls on intel_crtc_cursor_set_obj() (Daniel)
>>
>> Testcase: igt/pm_rpm/cursor
>> Testcase: igt/pm_rpm/cursor-dpms
>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81645
>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>> index 1edfd1a..f1a9b5c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
>> @@ -8144,6 +8144,9 @@ static void intel_crtc_update_cursor(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>>       if (base == 0 && intel_crtc->cursor_base == 0)
>>               return;
>>
>> +     if (!intel_crtc->active)
>> +             return;
>> +
>>       I915_WRITE(CURPOS(pipe), pos);
>>
>>       if (IS_IVYBRIDGE(dev) || IS_HASWELL(dev) || IS_BROADWELL(dev))
>> @@ -8217,7 +8220,9 @@ static int intel_crtc_cursor_set_obj(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>>               if (need_vtd_wa(dev))
>>                       alignment = 64*1024;
>>
>> +             intel_runtime_pm_get(dev_priv);
>>               ret = i915_gem_object_pin_to_display_plane(obj, alignment, NULL);
>> +             intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv);
>
> put_fence() would need runtime pm too I think.

This is exactly why I wanted the get/put calls around everything on
those functions... I'll see if I can reproduce this on the test suite
too.

>
>>               if (ret) {
>>                       DRM_DEBUG_KMS("failed to move cursor bo into the GTT\n");
>>                       goto fail_locked;
>> --
>> 2.0.1
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC



-- 
Paulo Zanoni