RE: [RFC 1/3] drm: Add DAMAGE_CLIPS property to plane

[Deepak Singh Rawat]

> > > > +void drm_plane_enable_damage_clips(struct drm_plane *plane)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct drm_device *dev = plane->dev;
> > > > +	struct drm_mode_config *config = &dev->mode_config;
> > > > +
> > > > +	drm_object_attach_property(&plane->base, config-
> > > >prop_damage_clips, 0);
> > > > +}
> > > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_mode_config.h
> > > b/include/drm/drm_mode_config.h
> > > > index 7569f22..d8767da 100644
> > > > --- a/include/drm/drm_mode_config.h
> > > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_mode_config.h
> > > > @@ -628,6 +628,21 @@ struct drm_mode_config {
> > > >  	 */
> > > >  	struct drm_property *prop_crtc_id;
> > > >  	/**
> > > > +	 * @prop_damage_clips: Optional plane property to mark damaged
> > > regions
> > > > +	 * on the plane in framebuffer coordinates of the framebuffer
> > > attached
> > > > +	 * to the plane.
> > >
> > > Why should we make this optional? Looks like just another thing drivers
> > > might screw up, since we have multiple callbacks and things to set up for
> > > proper dirty tracking.
> >
> > Thanks Daniel for the review.
> >
> > I think not all compositor will be interested in sending damage, that was the
> > reason to make this optional. Also when damage is not set that means
> > user-space need full update just like eglSwapBuffersWithDamageKHR.
> >
> > I will add better documentation.
> 
> I think if we also handle this case in the helper that'd be even better:
> In the case of no damage, the helper/core code could automatically supply
> a damage rect for the entire buffer. That way drivers don't have to handle
> this case specially.
> -Daniel

Agreed.

> --