Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[PATCH v2 1/8] drm: Disable the cursor plane on atomic contexts with virtualized drivers"
2023 May 04
0
[PATCH v2 1/8] drm: Disable the cursor plane on atomic contexts with virtualized drivers
On Thu, 4 May 2023 13:27:22 +0200
Jonas ?dahl <jadahl at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:39:04PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 May 2023 01:50:25 +0000
> > Zack Rusin <zackr at vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 09:48 +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> > > > Zack Rusin <zackr at
2023 May 04
0
[PATCH v2 1/8] drm: Disable the cursor plane on atomic contexts with virtualized drivers
On Thu, 4 May 2023 01:43:51 +0000
Zack Rusin <zackr at vmware.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 10:54 +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 May 2023 03:35:29 +0000
> > Zack Rusin <zackr at vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2023-05-02 at 11:32 +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> > > > !! External Email
> > > >
2020 Dec 03
0
[PATCH 14/15] drm/vmwgfx: Remove references to struct drm_device.pdev
On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 03:06:20AM +0000, Zack Rusin wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 2, 2020, at 11:03, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 4:37 PM Zack Rusin <zackr at vmware.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Dec 2, 2020, at 09:27, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote:
2020 Dec 02
1
[PATCH 14/15] drm/vmwgfx: Remove references to struct drm_device.pdev
> On Dec 2, 2020, at 09:27, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Am 02.12.20 um 09:01 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann:
>> Hi
>> Am 30.11.20 um 21:59 schrieb Zack Rusin:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 24, 2020, at 06:38, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Using struct
2020 Nov 30
1
[PATCH 14/15] drm/vmwgfx: Remove references to struct drm_device.pdev
> On Nov 24, 2020, at 06:38, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote:
>
> Using struct drm_device.pdev is deprecated. Convert vmwgfx to struct
> drm_device.dev. No functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de>
> Cc: Roland Scheidegger <sroland at vmware.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf.c |
2023 Sep 22
1
[PATCH 8/9] drm/vmwgfx: Annotate struct vmw_surface_dirty with __counted_by
Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by
attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have
their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS
(for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family
functions).
As found with Coccinelle[1], add __counted_by for struct vmw_surface_dirty.
[1]
2023 Sep 22
1
[PATCH 8/9] drm/vmwgfx: Annotate struct vmw_surface_dirty with __counted_by
Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by
attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have
their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS
(for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family
functions).
As found with Coccinelle[1], add __counted_by for struct vmw_surface_dirty.
[1]
2023 Sep 22
1
[PATCH 8/9] drm/vmwgfx: Annotate struct vmw_surface_dirty with __counted_by
Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by
attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have
their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS
(for array indexing) and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE (for strcpy/memcpy-family
functions).
As found with Coccinelle[1], add __counted_by for struct vmw_surface_dirty.
[1]
2023 Mar 13
0
[PATCH] drm/virtio: Enable fb damage clips property for the primary plane
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 01:59:42PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Christian Hergert reports that the driver doesn't enable the property and
> that leads to always doing a full plane update, even when the driver does
> support damage clipping for the primary plane.
>
> Don't enable it for the cursor plane, because its .atomic_update callback
> doesn't handle
2023 Feb 14
0
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>
> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
> before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
> of working against a partially constructed object, which may also be in
> the process of having its creation fail, can have a range of
2023 Feb 14
0
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>
> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
> before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
> of working against a partially constructed object, which may also be in
> the process of having its creation fail, can have a range of
2023 Feb 20
0
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
Am 20.02.23 um 10:55 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 14/02/2023 13:59, Christian K?nig wrote:
>> Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>>
>>> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
>>> before the buffer object constructions is complete.
2023 Feb 14
3
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
of working against a partially constructed object, which may also be in
the process of having its creation fail, can have a range of negative
outcomes.
A lot of those will depend on what the individual
2023 Feb 14
3
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
of working against a partially constructed object, which may also be in
the process of having its creation fail, can have a range of negative
outcomes.
A lot of those will depend on what the individual
2023 Feb 20
1
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
On 20/02/2023 10:01, Christian K?nig wrote:
> Am 20.02.23 um 10:55 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 14/02/2023 13:59, Christian K?nig wrote:
>>> Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle
2023 Feb 20
1
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
On 20/02/2023 10:01, Christian K?nig wrote:
> Am 20.02.23 um 10:55 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 14/02/2023 13:59, Christian K?nig wrote:
>>> Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle
2023 Feb 20
2
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
Hi,
On 14/02/2023 13:59, Christian K?nig wrote:
> Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
>> before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
>> of working against a partially constructed object, which may
2023 Feb 20
2
[PATCH] drm/gem: Expose the buffer object handle to userspace last
Hi,
On 14/02/2023 13:59, Christian K?nig wrote:
> Am 14.02.23 um 13:50 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Currently drm_gem_handle_create_tail exposes the handle to userspace
>> before the buffer object constructions is complete. This allowing
>> of working against a partially constructed object, which may
2022 Dec 19
1
[PATCH v3] drm: Only select I2C_ALGOBIT for drivers that actually need it
Hello Uwe,
On 12/19/22 09:36, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> While working on a drm driver that doesn't need the i2c algobit stuff I
> noticed that DRM selects this code even though only 8 drivers actually use
> it. While also only some drivers use i2c, keep the select for I2C for the
> next cleanup patch. Still prepare this already by also selecting I2C for
> the individual
2023 Jan 10
1
[PATCH v2] drm/nouveau: Remove file nouveau_fbcon.c
Hello Thomas,
On 1/10/23 13:35, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Commit 4a16dd9d18a0 ("drm/nouveau/kms: switch to drm fbdev helpers")
> converted nouveau to generic fbdev emulation. The driver's internal
> implementation later got accidentally restored during a merge commit.
> Remove the file from the driver. No functional changes.
>
> v2:
> * point Fixes tag to