[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/10] drm/i915: Use atomic plane state in the primary plane update.

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 04:27:23PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 04:07:56PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > index 80a98bffd5ba..33200403a5db 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > @@ -13448,7 +13448,9 @@ intel_commit_primary_plane(struct drm_plane *plane,
> >  	if (!crtc->state->active)
> >  		return;
> >  
> > -	dev_priv->display.update_primary_plane(crtc, fb, crtc->x, crtc->y);
> > +	dev_priv->display.update_primary_plane(crtc, fb,
> > +					       state->src.x1 >> 16,
> > +					       state->src.y1 >> 16);
> >  }
> 
> You know I posted a pile of patches last spring to start cleaning up
> this mess. Maybe someone wants to rescue the patches and avoid some
> duplicate work?
> 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2015-March/061715.html

I double-checked that series again and I pulled in the first 3 patches
(which had an r-b), but for patches 4+ there's been some inconclusive
discussion afaict from a quick look. Did I miss a resend somewhere?

Thanks, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch