similar to: [PATCH 5/6] drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()

Currently, i915 appears to rely on blocking modesets on no-longer-present MSTB ports by simply returning NULL for ->best_encoder(), which in turn causes any new atomic commits that don't disable the CRTC to fail. This is wrong however, since we still want to allow userspace to disable CRTCs on no-longer-present MSTB ports by changing the DPMS state to off and this still requires that we

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 22:04 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:50:05PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > > * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent > > *

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:04:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:50:05PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > > * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent > >

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 12:48:59PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 22:22 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:04:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:50:05PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > >

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:44:14PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 20:44 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 12:48:59PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 22:22 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:04:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in drm_dp_mst_topology.c: /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots

On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 09:17 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:44:14PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 20:44 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > We could do this the other way around so it looks like this maybe > > > > struct kref; /* manages kfree() */ > > struct topology_kref; /* corresonds to lifetime in topology

On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 21:59 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 08:21:14PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > > * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent > > *

On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 04:39:57PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 16:23 -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 21:59 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 08:21:14PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > > >

On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 22:22 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:04:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 07:50:05PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > > > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > > > > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > >

Hi Sean, Thank you for the patch. On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:49:46PM -0400, Sean Paul wrote: > From: Sean Paul <seanpaul at chromium.org> > > Everyone who implements connector_helper_funcs->atomic_check reaches > into the connector state to get the atomic state. Instead of continuing > this pattern, change the callback signature to just give atomic state > and let the

From: Sean Paul <seanpaul at chromium.org> Everyone who implements connector_helper_funcs->atomic_check reaches into the connector state to get the atomic state. Instead of continuing this pattern, change the callback signature to just give atomic state and let the driver determine what it does and does not need from it. Eventually all atomic functions should do this, but that's

Hi Sean, On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 10:38:58AM -0400, Sean Paul wrote: > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 3:12 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:49:46PM -0400, Sean Paul wrote: > >> From: Sean Paul <seanpaul at chromium.org> > >> > >> Everyone who implements connector_helper_funcs->atomic_check reaches > >> into the connector state

Hi Daniel, On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 04:47:47PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 10:12:02PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:49:46PM -0400, Sean Paul wrote: > >> From: Sean Paul <seanpaul at chromium.org> > >> > >> Everyone who implements connector_helper_funcs->atomic_check reaches > >> into

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 04:35:47PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent > * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking > * per-port slot allocation