On 15/01/2025 16:49, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Tomi,
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 3:34 PM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/01/2025 16:08, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 2:46 PM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/01/2025 14:52, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 1:42 PM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/01/2025 14:33, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 12:11 PM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/01/2025 12:33, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 10:04 AM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Add Y10_LE32, a 10 bit greyscale format, with 3 pixels packed into
32-bit container.
Well, this is all somewhat beside the point. So is "_Y10_32" (or
"_R10_32" if we use R) fine?
IAARDD[*], but "10_32" makes me think it stores one 10-bit pixel in a
32-bit word (i.e. a 32-bit variant of R10). So [YR]PA4 would be better.
That would be a very silly format. So I think some HW guy is already
designing chips that have it.
[YR]10_PACKED_32? We can have longer names, we don't need to do encoding
like [YR]PA4.
[*] I am a rookie DRM developer...
I haven't heard that before...
Tomi
