Hi, On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 03:21:19PM +0200, Noralf Trønnes wrote: > >> The only way I see for that to happen, is to set > >> ->panel_orientation. And to repeat myself, imo that makes > >> 'orientation' a better name for this video= option. > > > > orientation and rotation are two different things to me. The > > orientation of a panel for example is absolute, while the rotation is > > a transformation. In this particular case, I think that both the > > orientation and the rotation should be taken into account, with the > > orientation being the default state, and the hardware / panel will > > tell us that, while the rotation would be a transformation from that > > default to whatever the user wants. > > > > More importantly, the orientation is a property of the hardware (ie, > > how the display has been assembled), while the rotation is a software > > construct. > > > > And if the property being used to expose that is the rotation, I guess > > it would make sense to just use the same name and remain consistent. > > Ok, I see. Based on this, I would assume that rotation would be relative > to the orientation, but I see that in this patch rotation doesn't take > orintation into account, it just overwrites it. Yeah, that's a good point. I've updated the next version to add the rotation on the command line to the orientation. > I don't how userspace deals with rotation on top of orientation. The orientation is exposed through the property, and the result is available through the plane's rotation, so I guess that it's enough? Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
