Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 29 Mar 2021 16:07:31 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
To:     Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
Cc:     Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>, od@zcrc.me,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm: DON'T require each CRTC to have a unique primary
 plane
Message-ID: <20210329140731.tvkfxic4fu47v3rz@gilmour>
References: <20210327112214.10252-1-paul@crapouillou.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ma4fyhct6ctei5gf"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210327112214.10252-1-paul@crapouillou.net>
Precedence: bulk


--ma4fyhct6ctei5gf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 11:22:14AM +0000, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> The ingenic-drm driver has two mutually exclusive primary planes
> already; so the fact that a CRTC must have one and only one primary
> plane is an invalid assumption.

I mean, no? It's been documented for a while that a CRTC should only
have a single primary, so I'd say that the invalid assumption was that
it was possible to have multiple primary planes for a CRTC.

Since it looks like you have two mutually exclusive planes, just expose
one and be done with it?

Maxime

--ma4fyhct6ctei5gf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRcEzekXsqa64kGDp7j7w1vZxhRxQUCYGHfIwAKCRDj7w1vZxhR
xUSDAPsGqc5zzSnYZCfcmnojYZS7LuvWh9Kha68wIFR3M6Oh3QEAqnn4XrHQSQK6
VUKwLex2PKocNX/KvUrb6Mi0W++SgQo=
=PloT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--ma4fyhct6ctei5gf--