Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 2 authors, 2012-08-17

Re: [PATCH 2/3] OMAPDSS: APPLY: Remove omap_dss_device references in wait_for_go functions

From: Tomi Valkeinen <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-17 12:35:06
Also in: linux-omap

On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 16:19 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
The functions dss_mgr_wait_for_go() and dss_mgr_wait_for_go_ovl() check if there
is an enabled display connected to the manager before trying to see the state of
the GO bit.

The checks related to the display can be replaced by checking the state of the
manager, i.e, whether the manager is enabled or not. This makes more sense than
checking with the connected display as the GO bit behaviour is more connected
with the manager state rather than the display state. A GO bit can only be set
if the manager is enabled. If a manager isn't enabled, we can safely assume that
the GO bit is not set.

Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja <redacted>
---
 drivers/video/omap2/dss/apply.c |   32 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/apply.c b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/apply.c
index 52a5940..74f1a58 100644
--- a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/apply.c
+++ b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/apply.c
@@ -424,17 +424,23 @@ static void wait_pending_extra_info_updates(void)
 int dss_mgr_wait_for_go(struct omap_overlay_manager *mgr)
 {
 	unsigned long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(500);
-	struct mgr_priv_data *mp;
+	struct mgr_priv_data *mp = get_mgr_priv(mgr);
 	u32 irq;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	int r;
 	int i;
-	struct omap_dss_device *dssdev = mgr->device;
 
-	if (!dssdev || dssdev->state != OMAP_DSS_DISPLAY_ACTIVE)
+	if (mgr_manual_update(mgr))
This needs to be inside the spinlock also.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 		return 0;
 
-	if (mgr_manual_update(mgr))
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&data_lock, flags);
+
+	if (!mp->enabled) {
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data_lock, flags);
 		return 0;
+	}
+
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&data_lock, flags);
 
 	r = dispc_runtime_get();
 	if (r)
@@ -442,10 +448,8 @@ int dss_mgr_wait_for_go(struct omap_overlay_manager *mgr)
 
 	irq = dispc_mgr_get_vsync_irq(mgr->id);
 
-	mp = get_mgr_priv(mgr);
 	i = 0;
 	while (1) {
-		unsigned long flags;
 		bool shadow_dirty, dirty;
 
 		spin_lock_irqsave(&data_lock, flags);
@@ -489,21 +493,28 @@ int dss_mgr_wait_for_go_ovl(struct omap_overlay *ovl)
 {
 	unsigned long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(500);
 	struct ovl_priv_data *op;
-	struct omap_dss_device *dssdev;
+	struct mgr_priv_data *mp;
 	u32 irq;
+	unsigned long flags;
 	int r;
 	int i;
 
 	if (!ovl->manager)
 		return 0;
And this should be inside spinlock (yes, you didn't change that, but now
that you're changing these... =)
 
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
-	dssdev = ovl->manager->device;
+	mp = get_mgr_priv(ovl->manager);
 
-	if (!dssdev || dssdev->state != OMAP_DSS_DISPLAY_ACTIVE)
+	if (ovl_manual_update(ovl))
Inside spinlock here too.

Actually, shouldn't the whole wait_for functions be locked with the
apply mutex? Otherwise the output can be disabled/changed while waiting.

On the other hand, that could be quite a long lock, and I don't see
anything in the code that could really break if the output is disabled
or similar. Perhaps it's fine to just hit the timeout in case something
has been changed. If we add a mutex, we risk breaking something that
currently works =).

 Tomi

Attachments

Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help