Regards
Shashank
On 3/23/2017 6:33 PM, Jose Abreu wrote:
Hi Shashank,
On 23-03-2017 16:08, Sharma, Shashank wrote:
Regards
Shashank
On 3/23/2017 5:57 PM, Jose Abreu wrote:
Hi Ville,
On 23-03-2017 15:45, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 03:28:29PM +0000, Jose Abreu wrote:
Hi Shashank,
On 23-03-2017 15:14, Shashank Sharma wrote:
HDMI 1.4b support the CEA video modes as per range of
CEA-861-D (VIC 1-64).
For any other mode, the VIC filed in AVI infoframes should
be 0.
HDMI 2.0 sinks, support video modes range as per CEA-861-F
spec, which is
extended to (VIC 1-107).
This patch adds a bool input variable, which indicates if
the connected
sink is a HDMI 2.0 sink or not. This will make sure that we
don't pass a
HDMI 2.0 VIC to a HDMI 1.4 sink.
This patch touches all drm drivers, who are callers of this
function
drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_from_display_mode but to make sure
there is
no change in current behavior, is_hdmi2 is kept as false.
In case of I915 driver, this patch checks the
connector->display_info
to check if the connected display is HDMI 2.0.
Cc: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jose Abreu <jose.abreu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>
PS: This patch touches a few lines in few files, which were
already above 80 char, so checkpatch gives 80 char warning
again.
- gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_encoder.c
- gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
Signed-off-by: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/dce_v10_0.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/dce_v11_0.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/dce_v8_0.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix-anx78xx.c | 3 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sii902x.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 12 +++++++++++-
drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c | 5 ++++-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c | 3 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_encoder.c | 3 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_audio.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/inno_hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/sti/sti_hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/sor.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_hdmi.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/zte/zx_hdmi.c | 2 +-
include/drm/drm_edid.h | 3 ++-
21 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
[snip]
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c
index af93f7a..5ff2886 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c
@@ -1146,7 +1146,7 @@ static void hdmi_config_AVI(struct
dw_hdmi *hdmi, struct drm_display_mode *mode)
u8 val;
/* Initialise info frame from DRM mode */
- drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_from_display_mode(&frame, mode);
+ drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_from_display_mode(&frame, mode,
false);
if (hdmi->hdmi_data.enc_out_format == YCBCR444)
frame.colorspace = HDMI_COLORSPACE_YUV444;
dw-hdmi controller has full support for HDMI 2.0 features.
It all
depends on the platform it is integrated.
I think adding a parameter to
drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_from_display_mode is not the best idea
because of this case: A bridge can have support for HDMI 2.0
features but the platform may limit this support. I guess it
can
happen in other drivers too.
Your driver is in full control of what gets passed here. So I
don't see
why that would be a problem.
Also this doesn't really have anything to do with the
capabilities of
the source. All we want to make sure is that we don't send a
VIC the
sink will not understand.
But the driver is not aware of the platform limitations, its
generic to the controller only. We could add a field in pdata
which tells if platform is HDMI 2.0+ but what about other bridge
drivers or HDMI drivers? They will have to replicate the same
thing also.
Best regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu
I think the driver would be aware of the platform's
capabilities, isn't it ?
Else how would it even decide which mode to allow, and which to
reject ?
The DRM core propagates the mode to the chain of configuration
before reaching the bridge driver also, there is a callback
supplied by pdata (mode_valid) which can check if the mode is
valid. (see
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-hdmi.c?h=drm-next#n1740)
Best regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu
Regards
Shashank
Please correct me if my understanding is not right, but drivers call
mode_valid() to prune/reject modes which they cant support.
and they call drm_set_infoframe_from_videomode() function, when they are
going ahead to the modeset with a mode.
Why would a driver choose to do a modeset, which it could not support
(shouldn't mode_valid have dropped it in atomic_check() or may be even
edid_parsing time ?)
Regards
Shashank
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
