| Message ID | 1358801403-4726-1-git-send-email-j.glisse@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> > > Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, > quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption. > > Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c > index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c > @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, > y = 0; > } > > - if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { > + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be: if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) { Alex > int i = 0; > struct drm_crtc *crtc_p; > > -- > 1.7.11.7 > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >> >> Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, >> quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, >> y = 0; >> } >> >> - if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { >> + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { > > I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI > is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be: > > if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) { > Yeah i considered that too. Cheers, Jerome
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >> >> Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, >> quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, >> y = 0; >> } >> >> - if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { >> + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { > > I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI > is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be: > > if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) { Actually, the two patches are identical since: #define ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev) ((rdev->family >= CHIP_ARUBA)) but I think the DCE6 variant is clearer. Once I verify with the hw team I'll add the patch with that change. Thanks! Alex > > Alex > >> int i = 0; >> struct drm_crtc *crtc_p; >> >> -- >> 1.7.11.7 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dri-devel mailing list >> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:50 PM, <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: >>> From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >>> >>> Aruba and newer gpu does not need the avivo cursor work around, >>> quite the opposite this work around lead to corruption. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >>> index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c >>> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, >>> y = 0; >>> } >>> >>> - if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { >>> + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { >> >> I believe these issues were fixed on DCE6, but I'm verifying now. SI >> is dce6 as well so the check here should probably be: >> >> if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && !ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev)) { > > Actually, the two patches are identical since: > #define ASIC_IS_DCE6(rdev) ((rdev->family >= CHIP_ARUBA)) > but I think the DCE6 variant is clearer. Once I verify with the hw > team I'll add the patch with that change. > > Thanks! > > Alex > Yes they are identical, i meant that i considered doing it that way but i did not have strong feeling. :) Cheers, Jerome
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c index ad6df62..30f71cc 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cursor.c @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ int radeon_crtc_cursor_move(struct drm_crtc *crtc, y = 0; } - if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev)) { + if (ASIC_IS_AVIVO(rdev) && (rdev->family < CHIP_ARUBA)) { int i = 0; struct drm_crtc *crtc_p;