Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] drm/fb-helper: Add multi buffer support for cma fbdev

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 04:49:01PM -0800, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 06:07:10PM +0100, Stefan Lengfeld wrote:
> > Hi Maxime,
> > 
> > sorry, I have missed the discussion about the double buffering/virtual
> > surface size patch series two weeks ago. My comments about the patch are
> > inline:
> > 
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 05:19:08PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > From: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Mabye you should take the authorship here. Taking the credit and the
> > blame, because the patch was heavily modified by you and me. But I don't
> > really know what the offical police about that is.
> 
> I don't usually know when to do that as well. But yeah, you're
> probably right.

Sob line is the important bit, retaining original authorship is just
goodwill, and if in doubt showing more curtesy rarely hurts :-)

Patch applied to drm-misc, with Dave's ack after a quick irc discussion.
-Daniel

> 
> > > 
> > > This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma fbdev.
> > > Such as double buffer and triple buffer.
> > > 
> > > Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android
> > > devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these
> > > Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need
> > > some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So multi
> > > buffer for fbdev is needed.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > [s.christ@xxxxxxxxx: Picking patch from
> > >                      https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/14/188]
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Christ <s.christ@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Lengfeld <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > My surname has changed from "Christ" to "Lengfeld" recently. So my
> > review tag contains the new name.
> 
> Ack
> 
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig         |  9 +++++++++
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig
> > > index ebfe8404c25f..700c8b8e57a9 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig
> > > @@ -84,6 +84,15 @@ config DRM_FBDEV_EMULATION
> > >  
> > >  	  If in doubt, say "Y".
> > >  
> > > +config DRM_FBDEV_OVERALLOC
> > > +	int "Overallocation of the fbdev buffer"
> > > +	depends on DRM_FBDEV_EMULATION
> > > +	default 100
> > > +	help
> > > +	  Defines the fbdev buffer overallocation in percent. Default
> > > +	  is 100. Typical values for double buffering will be 200,
> > > +	  triple buffering 300.
> > > +
> > >  config DRM_LOAD_EDID_FIRMWARE
> > >  	bool "Allow to specify an EDID data set instead of probing for it"
> > >  	depends on DRM_KMS_HELPER
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > index e934b541feea..c6de87abaca8 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,12 @@ module_param_named(fbdev_emulation, drm_fbdev_emulation, bool, 0600);
> > >  MODULE_PARM_DESC(fbdev_emulation,
> > >  		 "Enable legacy fbdev emulation [default=true]");
> > >  
> > > +static int drm_fbdev_overalloc = CONFIG_DRM_FBDEV_OVERALLOC;
> > > +module_param(drm_fbdev_overalloc, int, 0444);
> > 
> > Maybe the variable should be of type "uint" instead of "int". This would
> > rule out the negative numbers error case.
> 
> Yep, I'll change it.
> 
> > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(drm_fbdev_overalloc,
> > > +		 "Overallocation of the fbdev buffer (%) [default="
> > > +		 __MODULE_STRING(CONFIG_DRM_FBDEV_OVERALLOC) "]");
> > > +
> > >  static LIST_HEAD(kernel_fb_helper_list);
> > >  static DEFINE_MUTEX(kernel_fb_helper_lock);
> > >  
> > > @@ -1573,6 +1579,10 @@ static int drm_fb_helper_single_fb_probe(struct drm_fb_helper *fb_helper,
> > >  		sizes.fb_height = sizes.surface_height = 768;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > +	/* Handle our overallocation */
> > > +	sizes.surface_height *= drm_fbdev_overalloc;
> > > +	sizes.surface_height /= 100;
> > > +
> > 
> > The code can trigger an arithmetic overflow, but I think we can ignore
> > this error case here.
> > 
> > But there should be a check for drm_fbdev_overalloc not be smaller than
> > 100. If it is smaller, the variable drm_fbdev_overalloc should have the
> > default value "100". Otherwise the virtual surface height can be smaller
> > than the physical height. This could trigger a lot of errors in existing
> > code paths.
> 
> That's a really good point, I'll change that.
> 
> Thanks!
> Maxime
> 
> -- 
> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> http://free-electrons.com



> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel


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