Hi Joe, On Tuesday 01 Aug 2017 10:24:25 Joe Kniss wrote: > On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Monday 31 Jul 2017 11:29:13 Joe Kniss wrote: > >> New getfb2 functionality uses drm_mode_fb_cmd2 struct to be symmetric > >> with addfb2. > > > > What's the use case for this ? We haven't needed such an ioctl for so long > > that it seemed to me that userspace doesn't really need it, but I could be > > wrong. > > Sorry, I failed to reference the original email. Here it is: > > <snip> > I am a recent addition to Google's ChromeOS gfx team. I am currently > working on display testing and reporting. An important part of this is > our screen capture tool, which works by querying drm for crtcs, planes, and > fbs. Unfortunately, there is only limited information available via > drmModeGetFB(), which often wrong information when drmModeAddFB2() was used > to create the fbs. For example, if the pixel format is NV12 or YUV420, > the fb returned knows nothing about the additional buffer planes required > by these formats. Ideally, we would like a function (e.g. drmModeGetFB2) > to return information symmetric with drmModeAddFB2 including the pixel > format id, buffer plane information etc. > </snip> > > ChromeOS has needed this functionality from the start, for both testing and > error reporting. We got away with guessing the buffer's format (32bit > xrgb) until now. We are now enabling overlays and more formats including > multi-planar (e.g. NV12). Current getfb() reports neither the pixel format > nor planar information. Without this information, going forward, our gfx > testing is going to break. It would be great if we had access to higher > level buffer structs (like gbm), but we generally don't since they would be > created by other apps (chrome browser, android apps, etc...). How is screen capture implemented ? Do you enumerate the framebuffers being scanned out, dump their contents and compose them manually based on the active plane configuration ? If so, isn't this very race-prone ? > >> Also modifies *_fb_create_handle() calls to accept a > >> format_plane_index so that handles for each plane can be generated. > >> Previously, many *_fb_create_handle() calls simply defaulted to plane 0 > >> only. > > > > And with this patch the amd/amdgpu, armada, gma500, i915, mediatek, msm, > > nouveau and radeon drivers still do. Do none of them support multi-planar > > formats ? > > I would imagine that some of these do support multi-planar formats, but > they don't appear to have them implemented yet (except perhaps as offsets > into a single buffer). I will certainly be looking into this soon, but any > changes will come in future patches. > > >> Signed-off-by: Joe Kniss <djmk@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_display.c | 5 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_fb.c | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc_internal.h | 2 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c | 11 ++-- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_framebuffer.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fb.c | 7 ++- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/framebuffer.c | 2 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_fb.c | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_fb.c | 5 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_fb.c | 5 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c | 5 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c | 6 ++- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c | 9 +++- > >> include/drm/drm_framebuffer.h | 1 + > >> include/uapi/drm/drm.h | 2 + > >> 18 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > [snip] > > > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_framebuffer.c > >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_framebuffer.c index 28a0108a1ab8..67b3be1bedbc > >> 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_framebuffer.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_framebuffer.c > >> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ [snip] > >> +/** > >> + * drm_mode_getfb2 - get FB info > >> + * @dev: drm device for the ioctl > >> + * @data: data pointer for the ioctl > >> + * @file_priv: drm file for the ioctl call > >> + * > >> + * Lookup the FB given its ID and return info about it. > >> + * > >> + * Called by the user via ioctl. > >> + * > >> + * Returns: > >> + * Zero on success, negative errno on failure. > >> + */ > >> +int drm_mode_getfb2(struct drm_device *dev, > >> + void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv) > >> +{ > >> + struct drm_mode_fb_cmd2 *r = data; > >> + struct drm_framebuffer *fb; > >> + int ret, i; > >> + > >> + if (!drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_MODESET)) > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + > >> + fb = drm_framebuffer_lookup(dev, r->fb_id); > >> + if (!fb) > >> + return -ENOENT; > >> + > >> + r->height = fb->height; > >> + r->width = fb->width; > >> + r->pixel_format = fb->format->format; > >> + for (i = 0; i < 4; ++i) { > >> + r->pitches[i] = fb->pitches[i]; > >> + r->offsets[i] = fb->offsets[i]; > >> + r->modifier[i] = fb->modifier; > >> + r->handles[i] = 0; > >> + } > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < fb->format->num_planes; ++i) { > >> + if (fb->funcs->create_handle) { > >> + if (drm_is_current_master(file_priv) || > >> + capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) || > >> + drm_is_control_client(file_priv)) { > >> + ret = fb->funcs->create_handle(fb, i, > >> file_priv, > >> + > >> &r->handles[i]); > >> + if (ret) > >> + break; > >> + } else { > >> + /* GET_FB() is an unprivileged ioctl so we > >> must > >> + * not return a buffer-handle to > >> non-master > >> + * processes! For backwards-compatibility > >> + * reasons, we cannot make GET_FB() > >> privileged, > >> + * so just return an invalid handle for > >> + * non-masters. */ > > > > There's no backward compatibility to handle here, just make it privileged > > if it has to be. > > Sure thing, sounds good. > > > > + r->handles[i] = 0; > > > + ret = 0; > > > + } > > > + } else { > > > + ret = -ENODEV; > > > + break; > > > + } > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* If handle creation failed, delete/dereference any that were > > > > made. > > */ > > > > > + if (ret) { > > > + for (i = 0; i < 4; ++i) { > > > + if (r->handles[i]) > > > + drm_gem_handle_delete(file_priv, r- > > >handles[i]); > > > > My initial reaction to this was to reply that not all drivers use GEM, but > > after some investigation it seems they actually do. If that's really the > > case, we could get rid of the .create_handle() operation completely, which > > should simplify the implementation of both DRM_IOCTL_MODE_GETFB and > > DRM_IOCTL_MODE_GETFB2. > > Deleting the handle is the same in all cases, but creating the handle > isn't consistent across the drivers. I didn't see a clean way to simplify > this. Creating the handle seems to be fairly consistent, except for a very small number of special cases. If we stored the GEM object pointers in the drm_framebuffer structure, the common case would be simplified. Or maybe I've missed something :-) > >> + r->handles[i] = 0; > >> + } > >> + } > >> + > >> + drm_framebuffer_unreference(fb); > >> + > >> + return ret; > >> +} [snip] > >> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/drm.h > >> index b2c52843bc70..c81c75335cca 100644 > >> --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm.h > >> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm.h > >> @@ -814,6 +814,8 @@ extern "C" { > >> > >> #define DRM_IOCTL_MODE_CREATEPROPBLOB DRM_IOWR(0xBD, struct > >> drm_mode_create_blob) > >> #define DRM_IOCTL_MODE_DESTROYPROPBLOB DRM_IOWR(0xBE, struct > >> drm_mode_destroy_blob) > >> > >> +#define DRM_IOCTL_MODE_GETFB2 DRM_IOWR(0xC4, struct drm_mode_fb_cmd2) > >> + > > > > Which tree is this based on ? The last defined ioctl > > (DRM_IOCTL_SYNCOBJ_FD_TO_HANDLE) is 0xC2 in drm-next and drm-misc-next. > > I just did a quick search for "DRM_IOWR 0xC*" and picked the first unused > one, there was a patch in-flight from last month that used 0xC3 ( > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/2017-June/010153.html). > Naturally, I'll set this to whatever is appropriate. The best is to base your patch on top of the drm-misc-next branch of the drm- misc tree. Whoever is merged first will win the ioctl number :-) Of course it means rebasing if someone else wins the race, but that shouldn't be a big deal. > > > /** > > > > > > * Device specific ioctls should only be in their respective headers > > > * The device specific ioctl range is from 0x40 to 0x9f. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx