Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl
From: Ville Syrjälä <hidden>
Date: 2010-11-26 12:55:39
Also in:
linux-omap
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2010-11-25 · RE: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl · Hiremath, Vaibhav <hidden>
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 05:38:11PM +0530, ext Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Hiremath, Vaibhav Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 5:34 PM To: 'Måns Rullgård'; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctlquoted
-----Original Message----- From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-omap- owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Måns Rullgård Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 2:09 PM To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl "Hiremath, Vaibhav" [off-list ref] writes:quoted
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@nokia.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:01 PM To: Hiremath, Vaibhav Cc: Tomi Valkeinen; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:39:44PM +0530, ext Hiremath, Vaibhavwrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Tomi Valkeinen [mailto:tomi.valkeinen@nokia.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 2:28 PM To: Hiremath, Vaibhav Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OMAP:DSS: possible bug in WAITFOR_VSYNC ioctl On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 23:46 +0530, ext Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote:quoted
Hi,<snip>quoted
quoted
<snip..>quoted
quoted
quoted
As far as WAITFORGO is concerned, I think GO bit concept is something OMAP notion/term and doesn't make sense to standardize it. Atleast I am not aware of any other architecture having GO bit.Naming is minor detail. Feel free to suggest a better one.[Hiremath, Vaibhav] If I fail to convince on this, then I think the only left option is to make WAITFORGO ioctl generic. And put a disclaimer on WAITFORVSYNC, it must not be used in panning use-case.[Hiremath, Vaibhav] Also let me bring another point here, If I understand correctly most of the application libraries (DirectFB, X, etc..) does use FBIO_WAITFORVSYNC to synchronize with HW, and manage ping pong mechanism.
DirectFB uses it also for waiting for vsync.
With this finding, in case of OMAP3 we have to use OMAPFB_WAITFORGO (breaking standard applications).
Applications using the standard fbdev API won't work with manual update displays anyway. You need omapfb specific code to handle it so having another small difference is not a big deal. In DirectFB the that's trivial since there's already a simple omap gfxdriver where you could override the default flip functionality with WAITFORGO based stuff. Or, as I said, you could add another standard ioctl and fix up userspace to use it where appropriate and if the kernel driver supports it. -- Ville Syrjälä