[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 14/15] drm/i915: Track frontbuffer invalidation/flushing

[Chris Wilson]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 07:51:34PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> +/**
> + * intel_fb_flip_prepare - flip frontbuffer
> + * @obj: GEM object to flush
> + *
> + * This function gets called after scheduling a flip on @obj. The actual
> + * frontbuffer flushing will be delayed until completion is signalled with
> + * intel_frontbuffer_flip_complete. If an invalidate happens in between this
> + * flush will be cancelled.
> + *
> + * Note that the frontbuffer tracking bits in obj->frontbuffer_bits must have
> + * been updated already.
> + */
> +void intel_fb_flip_prepare(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> +{
> +	struct drm_device *dev = obj->base.dev;
> +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> +
> +	WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&dev->struct_mutex));
> +	WARN_ON(!obj->frontbuffer_bits);
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> +	dev_priv->fb_tracking.flip_bits
> +		|= obj->frontbuffer_bits;
> +	mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * intel_frontbuffer_flip_complete - complete frontbuffer flip
> + * @dev: DRM device
> + * @frontbuffer_bits: frontbuffer plane tracking bits
> + *
> + * This function gets called after the flip has been latched and will complete
> + * on the next vblank. It will execute the fush if it hasn't been cancalled yet.
> + *
> + * Can be called without any locks held.
> + */
> +void intel_frontbuffer_flip_complete(struct drm_device *dev,
> +				     unsigned frontbuffer_bits)
> +{
> +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> +	/* Mask any cancelled flips. */
> +	frontbuffer_bits &= dev_priv->fb_tracking.flip_bits;
> +	dev_priv->fb_tracking.flip_bits &= ~frontbuffer_bits;
> +	mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> +
> +	intel_frontbuffer_flush(dev, frontbuffer_bits);
> +}

Let's be consistent and call this intel_fb_flip_complete. I am happy
with the slight confusion between intel_fb and
i915_frontbuffer_tracking, since they are related and it is easy enough
to make the conceptual leap that only the fb that are on the scanout
(ala frontbuffers) need to be tracked - but we only every need to track
fbs...
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre