Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c between commit abca9e454498 ("drm: Pass
'flags' from the caller to .get_scanout_position()") from the drm tree
and commit d59a63ad8234 ("drm/i915: Add intel_get_crtc_scanline()") from
the drm-intel tree.
I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
(no action is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
index 17d8fcb1b6f7,ffb56a9db9cc..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
@@@ -649,8 -675,9 +649,9 @@@ static bool ilk_pipe_in_vblank_locked(s
}
static int i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
- int *vpos, int *hpos,
+ unsigned int flags, int *vpos, int *hpos,
- ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime)
+ ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime,
+ bool adjust)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
struct drm_crtc *crtc = dev_priv->pipe_to_crtc_mapping[pipe];
@@@ -788,6 -786,24 +791,24 @@@
return ret;
}
+ static int i915_get_scanout_position(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
+ int *vpos, int *hpos,
+ ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime)
+ {
- return i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(dev, pipe, vpos, hpos,
++ return i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(dev, pipe, 0, vpos, hpos,
+ stime, etime, true);
+ }
+
+ int intel_get_crtc_scanline(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
+ {
+ int vpos = 0, hpos = 0;
+
- i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(crtc->dev, to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe,
++ i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(crtc->dev, to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe, 0,
+ &vpos, &hpos, NULL, NULL, false);
+
+ return vpos;
+ }
+
static int i915_get_vblank_timestamp(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
int *max_error,
struct timeval *vblank_time,
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c between commit abca9e454498 ("drm: Pass
> 'flags' from the caller to .get_scanout_position()") from the drm tree
> and commit d59a63ad8234 ("drm/i915: Add intel_get_crtc_scanline()") from
> the drm-intel tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
> (no action is required).
Oops, this patch escaped - it's only for 3.15. I've shuffled my
branches around now for the merge window so this should not pop up in
your -next tree again until 3.15 starts.
Yours, Daniel
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>
> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> index 17d8fcb1b6f7,ffb56a9db9cc..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> @@@ -649,8 -675,9 +649,9 @@@ static bool ilk_pipe_in_vblank_locked(s
> }
>
> static int i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
> - int *vpos, int *hpos,
> + unsigned int flags, int *vpos, int *hpos,
> - ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime)
> + ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime,
> + bool adjust)
> {
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> struct drm_crtc *crtc = dev_priv->pipe_to_crtc_mapping[pipe];
> @@@ -788,6 -786,24 +791,24 @@@
> return ret;
> }
>
> + static int i915_get_scanout_position(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
> + int *vpos, int *hpos,
> + ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime)
> + {
> - return i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(dev, pipe, vpos, hpos,
> ++ return i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(dev, pipe, 0, vpos, hpos,
> + stime, etime, true);
> + }
> +
> + int intel_get_crtc_scanline(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> + {
> + int vpos = 0, hpos = 0;
> +
> - i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(crtc->dev, to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe,
> ++ i915_get_crtc_scanoutpos(crtc->dev, to_intel_crtc(crtc)->pipe, 0,
> + &vpos, &hpos, NULL, NULL, false);
> +
> + return vpos;
> + }
> +
> static int i915_get_vblank_timestamp(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe,
> int *max_error,
> struct timeval *vblank_time,
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c between commit abca9e454498 ("drm: Pass
>> 'flags' from the caller to .get_scanout_position()") from the drm tree
>> and commit d59a63ad8234 ("drm/i915: Add intel_get_crtc_scanline()") from
>> the drm-intel tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
>> (no action is required).
>
> Oops, this patch escaped - it's only for 3.15. I've shuffled my
> branches around now for the merge window so this should not pop up in
> your -next tree again until 3.15 starts.
I just bisected boot failures on x86 chromebooks with -next to this
merge commit. I'll take a look tomorrow morning and make sure they're
gone.
-Olof
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c between commit abca9e454498 ("drm: Pass
>>> 'flags' from the caller to .get_scanout_position()") from the drm tree
>>> and commit d59a63ad8234 ("drm/i915: Add intel_get_crtc_scanline()") from
>>> the drm-intel tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
>>> (no action is required).
>>
>> Oops, this patch escaped - it's only for 3.15. I've shuffled my
>> branches around now for the merge window so this should not pop up in
>> your -next tree again until 3.15 starts.
>
> I just bisected boot failures on x86 chromebooks with -next to this
> merge commit. I'll take a look tomorrow morning and make sure they're
> gone.
Yep, looks happier today.
-Olof