similar to: [PATCH 0/9] drm/nouveau: Introduce CRC support for gf119+

Nvidia released some documentation on how CRC support works on their GPUs, hooray! So: this patch series implements said CRC support in nouveau, along with adding some special debugfs interfaces for some relevant igt-gpu-tools tests (already on the ML). First - we add some new functionality to kthread_work in the kernel, and then use this to add a new feature to DRM that Ville Syrj?l? came up

Nvidia released some documentation on how CRC support works on their GPUs, hooray! So: this patch series implements said CRC support in nouveau, along with adding some special debugfs interfaces for some relevant igt-gpu-tools tests (already on the ML). First - we add some new functionality to kthread_work in the kernel, and then use this to add a new feature to DRM that Ville Syrj?l? came up

Nvidia released some documentation on how CRC support works on their GPUs, hooray! So: this patch series implements said CRC support in nouveau, along with adding some special debugfs interfaces for some relevant igt-gpu-tools tests (already on the ML). First - we add some new functionality to kthread_work in the kernel, and then use this to add a new feature to DRM that Ville Syrj?l? came up

Nvidia released some documentation on how CRC support works on their GPUs, hooray! So: this patch series implements said CRC support in nouveau, along with adding some special debugfs interfaces for some relevant igt-gpu-tools tests (already on the ML). First - we add some new functionality to kthread_work in the kernel, and then use this to add a new feature to DRM that Ville Syrj?l? came up

Nvidia released some documentation on how CRC support works on their GPUs, hooray! So: this patch series implements said CRC support in nouveau, along with adding some special debugfs interfaces for some relevant igt-gpu-tools tests that we'll be sending in just a short bit. This additionally adds a feature that Ville Syrj?l? came up with: vblank works. Basically, this is just a generic DRM

Hello, while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to "drm_dev". I have no strong preference here though, so "drmdev" or "drm" are fine for me,

Hello, while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to "drm_dev". I have no strong preference here though, so "drmdev" or "drm" are fine for me,

If CONFIG_DRM_NOUVEAU=y,the following errors are seen while building crc.h. In file included from /scratch/linux/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c:47: /scratch/linux/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/crc.h: In function ?nv50_head_crc_late_register?: /scratch/linux/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/crc.h:109:47: error: parameter name omitted static inline int

Use the new atomic iterator macros, the old ones are about to be removed. With the new macros, it's more easy to get old and new state so get them from the macros instead of from obj->state. Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com> Cc: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com> Cc: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org ---

Use the new atomic iterator macros, the old ones are about to be removed. With the new macros, it's more easy to get old and new state so get them from the macros instead of from obj->state. Changes since v1: - Don't mix up old and new state. (danvet) - Rebase on top of interruptible swap_state changes. Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com> Cc:

This fixes the extra issues I discovered upstream after the introduction of my rework of the atomic VCPI helpers that occur during suspend/resume. This time around, we use a slightly different but much less complicated approach for fixing said issues. Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Lyude Paul (4): drm/dp_mst: Fix unbalanced malloc ref in drm_dp_mst_deallocate_vcpi()

nv50_head_atomic_duplicate_state() makes a copy of nv50_head_atom struct. This patch adds copying of struct member named "or", which previously was left uninitialized in the duplicated structure. Due to this bug, incorrect nhsync and nvsync values were sometimes used. In my particular case, that lead to a mismatch between the output resolution of the graphics device (GeForce GT 630 OEM)

It turns out that I forgot to go through and make sure that I converted all encoder callbacks to use atomic_enable/atomic_disable(), so let's go and actually do that. Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill at shutemov.name> Fixes: 09838c4efe9a ("drm/nouveau/kms: Search for encoders' connectors properly") ---

This fixes the extra issues I discovered upstream after the introduction of my rework of the atomic VCPI helpers that occur during suspend/resume. This time around, we use a slightly different but much less complicated approach for fixing said issues. Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Lyude Paul (4): drm/dp_mst: Fix unbalanced malloc ref in drm_dp_mst_deallocate_vcpi()

Realized when I moved nouveau over to using the atomic DP MST VCPI helpers that I forgot to ensure that we clamp the BPC to 8 to make us less likely to run out of bandwidth on a topology when enabling multiple displays that support >8 BPC - something we want to do until we have support for dynamically selecting the bpc based on the topology's available bandwidth, since userspace isn't

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

This introduces support for CRC readback on gf119+, using the documentation generously provided to us by Nvidia: https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-doc/blob/master/Display-CRC/display-crc.txt We expose all available CRC sources. SF, SOR, PIOR, and DAC are exposed through a single set of "outp" sources: outp-active/auto for a CRC of the scanout region, outp-complete for a CRC of both

The base917c_format isn't exported, so make it static to avoid the following warning: drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/base917c.c:26:1: warning: symbol 'base917c_format' was not declared. Should it be static? Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks at codethink.co.uk> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/base917c.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git