Hi,
On 18/11/2016 19:53, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
By providing our own format information for the CCS formats, we should
be able to make framebuffer_check() do the right thing for the CCS
surface as well.
Note that we'll return the same format info for both Y and Yf tiled
format as that's what happens with the non-CCS Y vs. Yf as well. If
desired, we could potentially return a unique pointer for each
pixel_format+tiling+ccs combination, in which case we immediately be
able to tell if any of that stuff changed by just comparing the
pointers. But that does sound a bit wasteful space wise.
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 40 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
index 7b7135be3b9e..de6909770c68 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
@@ -2488,6 +2488,42 @@ static unsigned int intel_fb_modifier_to_tiling(uint64_t fb_modifier)
}
}
+static const struct drm_format_info ccs_formats[] = {
+ { .format = DRM_FORMAT_XRGB8888, .depth = 24, .num_planes = 2, .cpp = { 4, 1, }, .hsub = 16, .vsub = 8, },
+ { .format = DRM_FORMAT_XBGR8888, .depth = 24, .num_planes = 2, .cpp = { 4, 1, }, .hsub = 16, .vsub = 8, },
+ { .format = DRM_FORMAT_ARGB8888, .depth = 32, .num_planes = 2, .cpp = { 4, 1, }, .hsub = 16, .vsub = 8, },
+ { .format = DRM_FORMAT_ABGR8888, .depth = 32, .num_planes = 2, .cpp = { 4, 1, }, .hsub = 16, .vsub = 8, },
+};
+
+static const struct drm_format_info *
+lookup_format_info(const struct drm_format_info formats[],
+ int num_formats, u32 format)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < num_formats; i++) {
+ if (formats[i].format == format)
+ return &formats[i];
+ }
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+static const struct drm_format_info *
+intel_get_format_info(struct drm_device *dev,
+ const struct drm_mode_fb_cmd2 *cmd)
+{
+ switch (cmd->modifier[0]) {
+ case I915_FORMAT_MOD_Y_TILED_CCS:
+ case I915_FORMAT_MOD_Yf_TILED_CCS:
+ return lookup_format_info(ccs_formats,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(ccs_formats),
+ cmd->pixel_format);
+ default:
+ return NULL;
+ }
+}
+
static int
intel_fill_fb_info(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
struct drm_framebuffer *fb)
@@ -15922,6 +15958,7 @@ intel_user_framebuffer_create(struct drm_device *dev,
static const struct drm_mode_config_funcs intel_mode_funcs = {
.fb_create = intel_user_framebuffer_create,
+ .get_format_info = intel_get_format_info,
.output_poll_changed = intel_fbdev_output_poll_changed,
.atomic_check = intel_atomic_check,
.atomic_commit = intel_atomic_commit,
diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h
index a5890bf44c0a..2926d916f199 100644
--- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h
+++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h
@@ -218,6 +218,9 @@ extern "C" {
*/
#define I915_FORMAT_MOD_Yf_TILED fourcc_mod_code(INTEL, 3)
+#define I915_FORMAT_MOD_Y_TILED_CCS fourcc_mod_code(INTEL, 4)
+#define I915_FORMAT_MOD_Yf_TILED_CCS fourcc_mod_code(INTEL, 5)
+
I think when fb modifiers were started the idea was that we would later
partition our vendor bit space for different classes of things and have
helper functions to extract the tiling, etc, from them.
For example have first 3-4 bits represent the tiling, then in this case
one bit for CCS, etc.
Have you considered that when adding these ones, and concluded this
different scheme is better for some reason?
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
