[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/7] drm: Add support for optional per-plane rotation property

[Joonas Lahtinen]

On ke, 2016-07-20 at 17:08 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 04:51:57PM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > 
> > On ke, 2016-07-20 at 16:18 +0300, ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Not all planes on the ssytem may support the same rotations/reflections,
> > s/ssytem/system/
> > 
> > > 
> > > so make it possible to create a separate property for each plane.
> > > This way userspace gets told exactly which rotations/reflections are
> > > possible for each plane.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c    | 6 ++++--
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c | 6 +++++-
> > >  include/drm/drm_crtc.h          | 2 ++
> > >  3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > > index 5f0002897862..38b023da6f09 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > > @@ -710,7 +710,8 @@ int drm_atomic_plane_set_property(struct drm_plane *plane,
> > >  		state->src_w = val;
> > >  	} else if (property == config->prop_src_h) {
> > >  		state->src_h = val;
> > > -	} else if (property == config->rotation_property) {
> > > +	} else if (property == config->rotation_property ||
> > > +		   property == plane->rotation_property) {
> > >  		if (!is_power_of_2(val & DRM_ROTATE_MASK))
> > >  			return -EINVAL;
> > >  		state->rotation = val;
> > > @@ -768,7 +769,8 @@ drm_atomic_plane_get_property(struct drm_plane *plane,
> > >  		*val = state->src_w;
> > >  	} else if (property == config->prop_src_h) {
> > >  		*val = state->src_h;
> > > -	} else if (property == config->rotation_property) {
> > > +	} else if (property == config->rotation_property ||
> > > +		   property == plane->rotation_property) {
> > >  		*val = state->rotation;
> > >  	} else if (plane->funcs->atomic_get_property) {
> > >  		return plane->funcs->atomic_get_property(plane, state, property, val);
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > index ce54e985d91b..ce536c0553e5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > @@ -392,7 +392,11 @@ static int restore_fbdev_mode(struct drm_fb_helper *fb_helper)
> > >  		if (plane->type != DRM_PLANE_TYPE_PRIMARY)
> > >  			drm_plane_force_disable(plane);
> > >  
> > > -		if (dev->mode_config.rotation_property) {
> > > +		if (plane->rotation_property) {
> > > +			drm_mode_plane_set_obj_prop(plane,
> > > +						    plane->rotation_property,
> > > +						    BIT(DRM_ROTATE_0));
> > > +		} else if (dev->mode_config.rotation_property) {
> > Why not clear the mode_config.rotation_property too, still?
> I would be cleared if any plane uses it. Though I'm not sure mixing
> per-plane and global rotation props in one device makes any real sense.
> 
> Or maybe I should just nuke the global property?

Maybe a vote for nuking, co-existence will unnecessarily complicate the
code. Only scenario I can see it working when planes with the property
are not used, and planes without are used solely. So the legacy
behaviour might not be very useful.

Regards, Joonas

-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation