Am Montag, 28. März 2016, 22:35:36 schrieb Emil Velikov: > On 28 March 2016 at 19:44, Heiko Stübner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Am Montag, 28. März 2016, 13:21:02 schrieb Emil Velikov: > >> On 22 March 2016 at 00:42, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Hi Yakir, > >> > > >> > Am Montag, 21. März 2016, 20:17:46 schrieb Yakir Yang: > >> >> On 03/21/2016 07:29 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote: > >> >> > Am Montag, 21. März 2016, 17:28:38 schrieb Yakir Yang: > >> >> >> This patch set would add the RGA direct rendering based 2d graphics > >> >> >> acceleration module. > >> >> > > >> >> > very cool to see that. > >> >> > >> >> ;) > >> >> > >> >> >> This patch set is based on git repository below: > >> >> >> git://people.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux drm-next > >> >> >> commit id: 568d7c764ae01f3706085ac8f0d8a8ac7e826bd7 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> And the RGA driver is based on Exynos G2D driver, it only manages > >> >> >> the > >> >> >> command lists received from user, so user should make the command > >> >> >> list > >> >> >> to data and registers needed by operation to use. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I have prepared an userspace demo application for testing: > >> >> >> https://github.com/yakir-Yang/libdrm-rockchip > >> >> >> > >> >> >> That is a rockchip libdrm library, and I have write a simple test > >> >> >> case > >> >> >> "rockchip_rga_test" that would test the below RGA features: > >> >> >> - solid > >> >> >> - copy > >> >> >> - rotation > >> >> >> - flip > >> >> >> - window clip > >> >> >> - dithering > >> >> > > >> >> > Did you submit your libdrm changes as well? > >> >> > > >> >> > Userspace-interfaces need to be stable so the other side must also > >> >> > get > >> >> > accepted - even before the kernel change if I remember correctly. > >> >> > >> >> Got it, and I just saw exynos_fimg2d already landed at mainline > >> >> libdrm. > >> >> But I don't find the way to submit patches to libdrm, would you like > >> >> share some helps here ;) > >> > > >> > Looking at the libdrm sources on cgit.freedesktop.org, I did not find > >> > any > >> > specific manual on submitting patches. > >> > > >> > But looking at the dri-list archive, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is > >> > the > >> > right list and looking at the libdrm history it looks like Emil Velikov > >> > <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> seems to be doing maintenance-stuff in > >> > libdrm. > >> > And as a 3rd recipient, please also include the linux-rockchip list. > >> > > >> > @Emil, please shout if I read that wrong :-) > >> > >> You got it spot on Heiko. There are a few notes though... > >> > >> As one reuses the existing hardware/IP block, it would be better to > >> avoid copy/pasting code around. > >> > >> Namely: > >> - (if possible) factor out the exynos g2d kernel functionality to a > >> > >> separate kernel module and wire up the rockhip (via dt ?) to use it > >> > >> - factor out the g2d specifics out of exynos_drm.h (into > >> > >> exynos_g2d_drm.h perhaps ?) and make sure exynos_drm.h includes the > >> new header > > > > I think the IP blocks themself are quite different between Rockchip's RGA > > and Samsung's g2d and I guess the similarities are more along the lines > > on how that gets integrated into the respective drm driver and userspace. > In this case, the exynos_g2d_drm.h seems like a good idea. As I'm > obviously biased, it's better to check how others feel on the topic. > > >> - if neither of these are possible, then please ensure that the new > >> > >> header uses correct types (see the docs [1]), use MIT/X11 license (if > >> possible) and link where upstream userspace is happy with the > >> interface (ideally more than a simple test app like libdrm) > >> These might sound like an overkill, although getting UAPI right and > >> maintaining it forever forces us to do so. > > > > As for a real-world usecase, maybe the armsoc xserver might be somewhat > > easy to use. While the core changes I did are in the core project > > already, I'm still keeping the actual Rockchip support separate [0] due > > to the not-yet- resolved create_gem ioctl. > > > > Anyway, the armsoc xserver has some exa implementation hooks were I guess > > it might be relatively easy to hook up soc-specific things. > > Ouch the armsoc ddx... Last time I've checked it felt like a place > where everyone is doing his own thing, with no actual reviews and/or > maintainer. The development rate is pretty low and maintainership is unclear but the per- soc voodoo is quite limited to the GEM-creation and everything else seems somewhat nice when compared for example to the older versions of the ddx. > Iirc most/all of it's functionality was achievable with > modesetting ddx (with or without glamor) ? I take it that things have > changed and/or I misunderstood something ? I don't really understand that whole stack or how xservers work on a whole ;-) I was merely able to make the _binary_ mali-driver work with this one and remembered that there were hooks for future per-soc exa functions. I guess for that glamor thing you'd need an actual gpu driver and not that libGL-override voodoo those crazy binary drivers do. At least the modesetting ddx didn't like mali-binary-driver. Heiko _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
