Op 26-02-2019 om 17:17 schreef Matt Roper: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 08:26:36AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Hey, >> >> Op 21-02-2019 om 01:28 schreef Matt Roper: >>> Some display controllers can be programmed to present non-black colors >>> for pixels not covered by any plane (or pixels covered by the >>> transparent regions of higher planes). Compositors that want a UI with >>> a solid color background can potentially save memory bandwidth by >>> setting the CRTC background property and using smaller planes to display >>> the rest of the content. >>> >>> To avoid confusion between different ways of encoding RGB data, we >>> define a standard 64-bit format that should be used for this property's >>> value. Helper functions and macros are provided to generate and dissect >>> values in this standard format with varying component precision values. >>> >>> v2: >>> - Swap internal representation's blue and red bits to make it easier >>> to read if printed out. (Ville) >>> - Document bgcolor property in drm_blend.c. (Sean Paul) >>> - s/background_color/bgcolor/ for consistency between property name and >>> value storage field. (Sean Paul) >>> - Add a convenience function to attach property to a given crtc. >>> >>> v3: >>> - Restructure ARGB component extraction macros to be easier to >>> understand and enclose the parameters in () to avoid calculations >>> if expressions are passed. (Sean Paul) >>> - s/rgba/argb/ in helper function/macro names. Even though the idea is >>> to not worry about the internal representation of the u64, it can >>> still be confusing to look at code that uses 'rgba' terminology, but >>> stores values with argb ordering. (Ville) >>> >>> v4: >>> - Drop the bgcolor_changed flag. (Ville, Brian Starkey) >>> - Clarify in kerneldoc that background color is expected to undergo the >>> same pipe-level degamma/csc/gamma transformations that planes do. >>> (Brian Starkey) >>> - Update kerneldoc to indicate non-opaque colors are allowed, but are >>> generally only useful in special cases such as when writeback >>> connectors are used (Brian Starkey / Eric Anholt) >>> >>> v5: >>> - Set crtc->state->bgcolor to solid black inside >>> drm_crtc_add_bgcolor_property() in case drivers don't do this >>> themselves. (Ville) >>> - Add kerneldoc to drm_crtc_add_bgcolor_property() function. >>> >>> Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Cc: wei.c.li@xxxxxxxxx >>> Cc: harish.krupo.kps@xxxxxxxxx >>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Sean Paul <sean@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Brian Starkey <Brian.Starkey@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Stéphane Marchesin <marcheu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by(v2): Sean Paul <sean@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@xxxxxxx> >> I like how bgcolor is a u64 now, but there is an issue with setting >> crtc->state->bgcolor in attaching the property. >> >> We should do it in atomic core init instead, like we already do for >> connector/plane properties.. >> >> See for example https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/52363/ >> >> This was specificallly for the background color proposal, but we >> probalby have to split out the non-trivial conversions of >> __drm_atomic_helper_crtc_reset. > Makes sense. What's the status of that patch? It looks like it has a > lot of a-b's/r-b's but hasn't landed yet. Is there anything blocking > it? If you're still driving it forward, I can wait for that to land and > then build on top of it. > > > Matt > I've split out the patch and landed some of the preparation patches, it should be good enough to unblock this patch series at least now. :) _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
