FYI
-----Original Message-----
From: Sharma, Shashank
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 8:32 PM
To: Daniel Vetter
Cc: David Herrmann; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Cn, Ramakrishnan;
Jindal, Sonika; Shankar, Uma
Subject: RE: Design review request: DRM color manager
David,
My apologies for starting a pre-mature design discussion.
Daniel,
Thanks for pointing out first two things, It was not known to me, I will
take care of this in future.
First time I presented color-manager design, in internal display design
forum, where most of the reviewers were not there.
We took the feedback from people who were present, and implemented the
design.
When we shared color manager implementation, that design was rejected and
one of the feedbacks was that it would be better to discuss it on dri-devel
where people outside Intel can give their opinion, and that’s the only
reason why I added dri-devel for the new design (Please see the attached
mail, I replied to all who were in last communication).
Please let me know how do we want to proceed now.
Regards
Shashank
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel
Vetter
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:18 PM
To: Sharma, Shashank
Cc: David Herrmann; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Thierry Reding; Cn, Ramakrishnan; Alex
Deucher; Jindal, Sonika; Shankar, Uma
Subject: Re: Design review request: DRM color manager
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:07:41PM +0000, Sharma, Shashank wrote:
Thanks again David,
Comments inline.
Three things:
- Please don't send out .pptx files to upstream/public mailing lists,
that's just not how the upstream community works.
- Please either fix up ms outlook to do proper in-line quoting or switch
to a proper mail client for discussions on dri-devel. I'm ok with this
on intel-gfx to some extend since that's our own turf, but on dri-devel
the usual rules apply.
- I think we should discuss this internally first or at least just on
intel-gfx.
David, thanks for taking a look at this but imo this shouldn't have
escaped yet to the public. My apologies for wasting your time trying to
review this proposal.
Thanks, Daniel
Regards
Shashank
-----Original Message-----
From: David Herrmann [mailto:dh.herrmann@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 5:10 PM
To: Sharma, Shashank
Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
Ville Syrjälä; Thierry Reding; Alex Deucher; Sean Paul;
robdclark@xxxxxxxxx; Mukherjee, Indranil; Jindal, Sonika; Korjani,
Vikas; Shankar, Uma; Cn, Ramakrishnan
Subject: Re: Design review request: DRM color manager
Hi
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Sharma, Shashank
<shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
1) Why do you register only a single property? Why not register a
separate property for each color-correction that is available? This way you
can drop the property-id and use the high-level DRM-prop IDs/names.
That’s the whole idea of color manager. If we keep on creating
properties for each color correction, there would be a big list and a lot of
properties will be exposed. Instead one common blob which can represent all
the properties, correction values and identifiers. It would be easy to club
with atomic modeset kind-of designs also I believe.
Where is the difference? With one _well-defined_ property for each type
we simply move the identification one level up. With your approach you just
move the type-id one level down into the blob.
Or in other words: Where is the difference between calling
SetProperty() n-times, or calling it once but with a parameter describing
n-properties? With atomic-modesetting we can set as many properties as we
want and make the kernel apply them atomically.
Actually we also do not want to populate the property space also, as
if there are 10 color correction methods possible for a hardware, we might
end up listing 10 properties. And there won't be common properties across
all the hardwares also. For example, Hardware A can have properties X Y Z
but Hardware B can have W X and Z. This will make the property space
inconsistent. But if we provide one common interface which will cover for
all the properties, for all the hardwares in a single blob. The driver will
dynamically register its property, in its own preferred name. A get_prop()
will always list down all the supported color property by this hardware and
driver.
2) What is the CRTC-ID for? DRM properties can be set on a specific CRTC
and/or plane. Isn't that enough information for the driver?
This is to make it HW agonist. Actually that's CRTC ID / Plane ID /
PIPE ID / all together an identifier. For example if I want to set gamma
correction for sprite planes only, not on primary plane or pipe level, on
VLV, its possible. This gives me flexibility to mention fine-tuned
correction even in a CRTC. The driver's .enable method can take decision on
this identifier based on the hardware capabilities.
Yeah, but I meant the drmModeObjectSetProperty() ioctl already tales a
CRTC/Plane/Connector ID. So why duplicate that information in the
blob? And more importantly, what happens if you call
drmModeObjectSetProperty() on a plane but specify a CRTC ID in the blob?
Seems weird to me to support such setups.
The design is to register color-manager as a CRTC property, to make it
consistent, and then give the fine tuning via this identifier byte.
Else we have to keep track of this in userspace, that which property is
valid for which extent. For example, Hue and saturation correction, on VLV,
can be applied on Sprite planes only(not on primary plane). So we have to
send a plane as an object here.
Rather in color manager case, we will always send the CRTC as an object
to IOCTL, but will specify SPRITE_PLANE as identifier. Does this sound less
weird now :) ?
3) Please document the payload for each of the properties you define.
If the property is a blob, there is no reason to make the properties
generic. User-space requires a common syntax across all drivers, otherwise,
it cannot make use of generic properties and you should use driver-dependent
properties instead.
Can you please elaborate a bit more ? I believe that a blob is a
superset of single and multi-valued properties. So we can use the byte
defined for <no of correction bytes> and specify both single value and multi
value correction using the same interface, >> method and protocol. So any
userspace can just follow this, any can give commands to any driver.
Well, your document doesn't describe the payload at all. I just wanted a
description of what kind of information is expected. Number of arguments,
argument size, argument types, argument description.. and so on.
Sure, I will further document it very clearly about arguments and
descriptions. Actually we have discussed the protocol in the color EDID
section, which tells us about the 4 byte protocol and expectation, but
that’s elementary.
4) We have a tuple-type for properties. So in case you only need 32bit
payloads for a given property, you can combine enable/disable and value in a
single 64bit property.
But properties like CSC and Gamma correction need multiple correction
values, up to 256 32-bit values. For this we need more no of values. AM I
getting it right ?
Sure.
Thanks
David
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch