|
Hi Ville,
As per our last discussion, following points were
discussed:
1. To suppress the aspect-ratio info from getblob
ioctl to a user that does not support it:
i. A new flag must be added to
drm_blob_property to mark if the blob has mode data.
ii. This flag must be set when the user tries
do an atomic modeset.
iii. In the getblob ioctl, based on the above
flag, it can be determined that if the blob
has mode data, and the aspect ratio info can
be suppressed in getblob ioctl, if user does not support it.
2. Instead of adding aspect ratio capabilities in
drm_atomic_state, pass on the file_priv which already has
the required information to the function
drm_mode_convert_umode.
It will require addition of an new argument
file_priv to several functions, but that is right thing to do,
as file_priv is the correct structure for the
capability information.
3. Changing the usermode aspect ratio flag bits,
without change in the
picture_aspect_ratio would not matter, and does not need to be
handled in this patch.
I just have one query here. We have agreed to modify
drm_mode_convert_umode, to filter out the aspect-ratio
info if user has not set aspect-ratio capability,
but do we need a similar change the drm_mode_convert_to_umode?
If we do, I am not sure if it would be possible
to have the file_priv to drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc,
which calls
drm_mode_convert_to_umode. The function drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc
is used to set mode, originating by kernel,
and make a blob from the kernel mode, which it
saves in crtc_state.
This function :
drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc, is called by several helper
functions and driver functions, and passing
file_priv from all these functions does not seem
to be plausible.
Any suggestions on how to handle this situation?
Regards,
Ankit
On 2/8/2018 9:59 AM, Nautiyal, Ankit K
wrote:
Hi Ville,
I still have some queries regarding the handling of aspect ratio
flags in getblob ioctl.
Please find below my responses inline.
On 2/1/2018 6:24 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 04:35:22PM +0530,
Nautiyal, Ankit K wrote:
Hi Ville,
Appreciate your time and the suggestions.
Please find my response inline:
On 1/31/2018 6:39 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:04:52PM
+0530, Nautiyal, Ankit K wrote:
On 1/30/2018 12:23 AM, Ville Syrjälä
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:51:33AM
+0530, Nautiyal, Ankit K wrote:
From: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@xxxxxxxxx>
If the user mode does not support aspect-ratio, and
requests for
a modeset, then the flag bits representing aspect
ratio in the
given user-mode must be rejected.
Similarly, while preparing a user-mode from kernel
mode, the
aspect-ratio info must not be given, if aspect-ratio
is not
supported by the user.
This patch:
1. adds a new bit field aspect_ratio_allowed in
drm_atomic_state,
which is set only if the aspect-ratio is supported by
the user.
2. discards the aspect-ratio info from the user mode
while
preparing kernel mode structure, during modeset, if
the
user does not support aspect ratio.
3. avoids setting the aspect-ratio info in user-mode,
while
converting user-mode from the kernel-mode.
Signed-off-by: Ankit Nautiyal <ankit.k.nautiyal@xxxxxxxxx>
V3: Addressed review comments from Ville:
-Do not corrupt the current crtc state by updating
aspect ratio
on the fly.
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 61
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c | 19 ++++++++++++++
include/drm/drm_atomic.h | 2 ++
3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
index 69ff763..39313e2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
@@ -316,6 +316,35 @@ static s32 __user
*get_out_fence_for_crtc(struct drm_atomic_state
*state,
return fence_ptr;
}
+/**
+ * drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_kmode
+ * @state: the crtc state
+ * @mode: kernel-internal mode, which is used to
create a duplicate mode,
+ * with updated picture aspect ratio.
+ *
+ * Allow the aspect ratio info in the kernel mode
only if aspect ratio is
+ * supported.
+ *
+ * RETURNS:
+ * kernel-internal mode with updated picture aspect
ratio value.
+ */
+
+struct drm_display_mode*
+drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_kmode(struct
drm_crtc_state *state,
+ const struct drm_display_mode
*mode)
+{
+ struct drm_atomic_state *atomic_state =
state->state;
+ struct drm_display_mode *ar_kmode;
+
+ ar_kmode =
drm_mode_duplicate(state->crtc->dev, mode);
+ /*
+ * If aspect ratio is not supported, set the
picture aspect ratio as
+ * NONE.
+ */
+ if (atomic_state &&
!atomic_state->allow_aspect_ratio)
+ ar_kmode->picture_aspect_ratio =
HDMI_PICTURE_ASPECT_NONE;
+ return ar_kmode;
+}
/**
* drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc - set mode for
CRTC
@@ -341,7 +370,10 @@ int
drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc(struct drm_crtc_state
*state,
state->mode_blob = NULL;
if (mode) {
- drm_mode_convert_to_umode(&umode, mode);
+ struct drm_display_mode *ar_mode;
+
+ ar_mode =
drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_kmode(state, mode);
+ drm_mode_convert_to_umode(&umode,
ar_mode);
This still looks sketchy.
I believe there are just two places where we need to
filter out the
aspect ratio flags from the umode, namely the getblob
and getcrtc
ioctls.
AFAIK The getblob ioctl can be called for edid blob,
gamma, ctm blob,
etc. apart from the mode blob.
Is there any way to check from blob id (or by any other
means),
if the data is for the mode, or edid, or gamma etc.
I think we'd have to somehow mark the mode blobs as special.
Until we
have more need for cleaning up blobs before returning them
to userspace
I think a simple flag should do. If we come up with more
uses like this
then it might make sense to introduce some kind of optional
filter
function for blobs.
If my understanding is correct,
1. To be able to do this, we need to change in uapi.
We should be fine with an internal flag. Obviously it won't be
set
for blobs freshly created by userspace, but that's fine because
we
do no other error checking for them either. The error checking
will
happen when the user tries to actually use the blob.
I am not sure why getblob ioctl should even come into picture.
(Perhaps I am missing something).
As per my understanding:
If a userspace needs to set a mode, it will just create a blob
with drm_mode_mode_info,
and get the blob-id. This blob-id would be supplied to
drm_mode_atomic_ioctl as a crtc
property mode_id.
At the kernel side, the crtc property mode_id is set by
looking-up for mode blob from blob id.
I am doing the change in the user mode aspect-ratio flags at this
junction.
As far as getblob ioctl is concerned, if the user does call
getblob ioctl for getting mode blob from
the blob id, it will receive the same mode blob, with same aspect
ratio info which the user had
created using create blob ioctl. If it does want to use the blob,
it has to come through the
drm_mode_atomic_ioctl way, where aspect ratio flags are handled.
2. Whenever the userspace creates a blob
for mode, the new flag/class
for blob type needs to be set.
Do you think that it's worth the effort?
If we can check that, I can make
sure that aspect-ratio flags are taken
care of, if the blob is for mode,
and the aspect ratio is not supported.
And for checking the user input I
think we should probably just
stick that into drm_mode_convert_umode(). Looks like we
never call
that from anywhere but the atomic/setprop and setcrtc
paths with
a non-NULL argument.
I *think* those three places should be sufficient to
cover everything.
Agreed. Infact I tried to do that first, but the only
problem we have
here, is that, the file_priv
which has the aspect ratio capability information is not
supplied to the
drm_mode_convert_umode()
or the functions calling, drm_mode_conver_umode(). At best
we have
drm_crtc_state.
Simply passing the file_priv down would seem like the most
obvious
solution.
This means we have to make change in various drivers and we
have to pull
the file_priv
parameter three levels down. Should we think of a better way
for doing this?
Coccinelle is pretty good at modifying function parameters.
Thanks for pointing out Coccinelle, will defintely try that out.
But my question here is whether we really want to drag the
file_priv
from drm_mode_atomic_ioctl --> drm_mode_atomic_set_property
-->
drm_atomic_crtc_set_property -->
drm_mode_set_mode_prop_for_crtc-->
drm_mode_convert_umode.
Instead, I tried to add a new field (allow_aspect_ratio) in
drm_crtc_state which is
already passed from the drm_mode_atomic_ioctl all the way to
drm_mode_convert_umode.
-Regards
Ankit
I have added an aspect ratio allowed
flag in drm_crtc_state->state so
that its available in the
functions calling drm_mode_convert_umode.
I am open to suggestion to avoid adding a new flag in
drm_atomic_state,
if there is a better
way to let the drm_mode_convert_umode( ) know that user
supports aspect
ratio capability.
state->mode_blob
=
drm_property_create_blob(state->crtc->dev,
sizeof(umode),
@@ -349,10 +381,11 @@ int
drm_atomic_set_mode_for_crtc(struct drm_crtc_state
*state,
if (IS_ERR(state->mode_blob))
return PTR_ERR(state->mode_blob);
- drm_mode_copy(&state->mode, mode);
+ drm_mode_copy(&state->mode, ar_mode);
state->enable = true;
DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("Set [MODE:%s] for CRTC
state %p\n",
- mode->name, state);
+ ar_mode->name, state);
+ drm_mode_destroy(state->crtc->dev,
ar_mode);
} else {
memset(&state->mode, 0,
sizeof(state->mode));
state->enable = false;
@@ -436,6 +469,25 @@
drm_atomic_replace_property_blob_from_id(struct
drm_device *dev,
}
/**
+ * drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_umode
+ * @state: the crtc state
+ * @umode: userspace mode, whose aspect ratio flag
bits are to be updated.
+ *
+ * Allow the aspect ratio info in the userspace mode
only if aspect ratio is
+ * supported.
+ */
+void
+drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_umode(struct
drm_crtc_state *state,
+ struct drm_mode_modeinfo *umode)
+{
+ struct drm_atomic_state *atomic_state =
state->state;
+
+ /* Reset the aspect ratio flags if aspect ratio
is not supported */
+ if (atomic_state &&
!atomic_state->allow_aspect_ratio)
+ umode->flags &=
(~DRM_MODE_FLAG_PIC_AR_MASK);
+}
+
+/**
* drm_atomic_crtc_set_property - set property on
CRTC
* @crtc: the drm CRTC to set a property on
* @state: the state object to update with the new
property value
@@ -464,6 +516,9 @@ int
drm_atomic_crtc_set_property(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
else if (property == config->prop_mode_id)
{
struct drm_property_blob *mode =
drm_property_lookup_blob(dev, val);
+
drm_atomic_allow_aspect_ratio_for_umode(state,
+ (struct drm_mode_modeinfo *)
+ mode->data);
ret =
drm_atomic_set_mode_prop_for_crtc(state, mode);
drm_property_blob_put(mode);
return ret;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
index f0556e6..a2d34fa 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
@@ -425,6 +425,13 @@ int drm_mode_getcrtc(struct
drm_device *dev,
drm_modeset_lock(&crtc->mutex, NULL);
if (crtc->state) {
if (crtc->state->enable) {
+ /*
+ * If the aspect-ratio is not required by
the,
+ * userspace, do not set the aspect-ratio
flags.
+ */
+ if (!file_priv->aspect_ratio_allowed)
+
crtc->state->mode.picture_aspect_ratio =
+ HDMI_PICTURE_ASPECT_NONE;
These would still clobber the current crtc state. So
definitely don't
want to do this.
Alright, so alternative way of doing this will be:
Avoid changing the
crtc->state->mode.picture_aspect_ratio i.e kernel
mode structure,
but set the aspect ratio flags in the usermode to none,
after calling the
drm_mode_convert_to_umode().
Will take care of this in the next patchset.
I gave a thought about it again. As you have mentioned earlier
that
get_crtc is one of the
place where the user mode aspect ratio flags must be filtered
out, is
this what you have
in mind. I hope I did not misunderstand.
Changing the usermode aspect ratio flag bits, without change
in the
picture_aspect_ratio
kernel mode will not result in both structures out of sync?
I don't think that should really matter. I suppose we might get
one
extra modeset when the user feeds that mode back via
setcrtc/atomic, but
meh. And actually the aspect ratio should only affect the
infoframe, so
we should be able to eventually eliminate that extra modeset and
just
update the infoframe instead.
drm_mode_convert_to_umode(&crtc_resp->mode,
&crtc->state->mode);
crtc_resp->mode_valid = 1;
@@ -435,6 +442,13 @@ int drm_mode_getcrtc(struct
drm_device *dev,
crtc_resp->x = crtc->x;
crtc_resp->y = crtc->y;
if (crtc->enabled) {
+ /*
+ * If the aspect-ratio is not required by
the,
+ * userspace, do not set the aspect-ratio
flags.
+ */
+ if (!file_priv->aspect_ratio_allowed)
+ crtc->mode.picture_aspect_ratio =
+ HDMI_PICTURE_ASPECT_NONE;
drm_mode_convert_to_umode(&crtc_resp->mode,
&crtc->mode);
crtc_resp->mode_valid = 1;
@@ -610,6 +624,11 @@ int drm_mode_setcrtc(struct
drm_device *dev, void *data,
goto out;
}
+ /* If the user does not ask for aspect
ratio, reset the aspect
+ * ratio bits in the usermode.
+ */
+ if (!file_priv->aspect_ratio_allowed)
+ crtc_req->mode.flags &=
(~DRM_MODE_FLAG_PIC_AR_MASK);
ret = drm_mode_convert_umode(mode,
&crtc_req->mode);
if (ret) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Invalid mode\n");
diff --git a/include/drm/drm_atomic.h
b/include/drm/drm_atomic.h
index 1c27526..130dad9 100644
--- a/include/drm/drm_atomic.h
+++ b/include/drm/drm_atomic.h
@@ -237,6 +237,7 @@ struct __drm_private_objs_state {
* @ref: count of all references to this state
(will not be freed until zero)
* @dev: parent DRM device
* @allow_modeset: allow full modeset
+ * @allow_aspect_ratio: allow the aspect ratio info
to be passes to user
* @legacy_cursor_update: hint to enforce legacy
cursor IOCTL semantics
* @async_update: hint for asynchronous plane
update
* @planes: pointer to array of structures with
per-plane data
@@ -256,6 +257,7 @@ struct drm_atomic_state {
struct drm_device *dev;
bool allow_modeset : 1;
+ bool allow_aspect_ratio : 1;
bool legacy_cursor_update : 1;
bool async_update : 1;
struct __drm_planes_state *planes;
--
2.7.4
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Regards,
Ankit
|
