On 2/12/2024 1:20 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 at 23:13, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/10/2024 1:17 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 21:19, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/10/2024 3:33 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 at 03:52, Paloma Arellano <quic_parellan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All the components of YUV420 over DP are added. Therefore, let's mark the
connector property as true for DP connector when the DP type is not eDP
and when there is a CDM block available.
Changes in v2:
- Check for if dp_catalog has a CDM block available instead of
checking if VSC SDP is allowed when setting the dp connector's
ycbcr_420_allowed parameter
Signed-off-by: Paloma Arellano <quic_parellan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c | 4 +++-
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c | 4 ++--
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c | 8 ++++++--
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.h | 3 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h | 5 +++--
5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
index 723cc1d821431..beeaabe499abf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
@@ -565,6 +565,7 @@ static int _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport(struct drm_device *dev,
{
struct drm_encoder *encoder = NULL;
struct msm_display_info info;
+ bool yuv_supported;
int rc;
int i;
@@ -583,7 +584,8 @@ static int _dpu_kms_initialize_displayport(struct drm_device *dev,
return PTR_ERR(encoder);
}
- rc = msm_dp_modeset_init(priv->dp[i], dev, encoder);
+ yuv_supported = !!(dpu_kms->catalog->cdm);
Drop parentheses please.
+ rc = msm_dp_modeset_init(priv->dp[i], dev, encoder, yuv_supported);
if (rc) {
DPU_ERROR("modeset_init failed for DP, rc = %d\n", rc);
return rc;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
index ebcc76ef1d590..9b9f5f2921903 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
@@ -1471,7 +1471,7 @@ static int dp_display_get_next_bridge(struct msm_dp *dp)
}
int msm_dp_modeset_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_device *dev,
- struct drm_encoder *encoder)
+ struct drm_encoder *encoder, bool yuv_supported)
{
struct dp_display_private *dp_priv;
int ret;
@@ -1487,7 +1487,7 @@ int msm_dp_modeset_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_device *dev,
return ret;
}
- dp_display->connector = dp_drm_connector_init(dp_display, encoder);
+ dp_display->connector = dp_drm_connector_init(dp_display, encoder, yuv_supported);
if (IS_ERR(dp_display->connector)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(dp_display->connector);
DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev->dev,
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
index 46e6889037e88..ab0d0d13b5e2c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_drm.c
@@ -353,7 +353,8 @@ int dp_bridge_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_device *dev,
}
/* connector initialization */
-struct drm_connector *dp_drm_connector_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_encoder *encoder)
+struct drm_connector *dp_drm_connector_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct drm_encoder *encoder,
+ bool yuv_supported)
{
struct drm_connector *connector = NULL;
@@ -361,8 +362,11 @@ struct drm_connector *dp_drm_connector_init(struct msm_dp *dp_display, struct dr
if (IS_ERR(connector))
return connector;
- if (!dp_display->is_edp)
+ if (!dp_display->is_edp) {
drm_connector_attach_dp_subconnector_property(connector);
+ if (yuv_supported)
+ connector->ycbcr_420_allowed = true;
Is there any reason to disallow YUV420 for eDP connectors?
+ }
Major reason was certainly validation but thinking about it more
closely, I need to check whether CDM over eDP is even possible.
Historically, CDM could output only to HDMI OR WB using the bit we
program while setting up CDM and the same HDMI path is being used by DP
as well. But I need to check whether CDM can even output to eDP with the
same DP path. I dont have any documentation on this part yet.
I had the feeling that the DP / eDP difference on the chips is mostly
on the PHY and software side. So I assumed that it should be possible
to output YUV data to the eDP port in the same way as it is done for
the DP port.
This is true. I was not worried about DP / eDP controller but mostly
whether eDP spec really allows YUV. From what I can read, it does.
So this check shall remain only because CDM has not been validated with eDP.
Do you need a TODO here and if we ever get a eDP panel which supports
that, we can validate and relax this.
Just move it out of the eDP check.
I would have said a no to this because it opens a trap door for untested
path which I usually hesitate but in this case, I am also curious to
know if there is going to be a eDP panel to test this out for us because
I have not seen any yet. So lets go ahead with the removal of !is_edp.
