Regards Shashank On 10/10/2015 5:24 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
Hi Shashank, On 9 October 2015 at 20:29, Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:BDW/SKL/BXT support Color Space Conversion (CSC) using a 3x3 matrix that needs to be programmed into respective CSC registers. This patch does the following: 1. Adds the core function to program CSC correction values for BDW/SKL/BXT platform 2. Adds CSC correction macros/defines Signed-off-by: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Kausal Malladi <kausalmalladi@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Kumar, Kiran S <kiran.s.kumar@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 7 ++ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.h | 12 ++- 3 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h index ed50f75..0e9d252 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h @@ -8085,4 +8085,11 @@ enum skl_disp_power_wells { (_PIPE3(pipe, PAL_PREC_GCMAX_A, PAL_PREC_GCMAX_B, PAL_PREC_GCMAX_C)) +/* BDW CSC correction */ +#define CSC_COEFF_A 0x49010 +#define CSC_COEFF_B 0x49110 +#define CSC_COEFF_C 0x49210 +#define _PIPE_CSC_COEFF(pipe) \ + (_PIPE3(pipe, CSC_COEFF_A, CSC_COEFF_B, CSC_COEFF_C)) + #endif /* _I915_REG_H_ */ diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.c index e659382..0a6c00c 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_color_manager.c @@ -330,11 +330,119 @@ static int bdw_set_degamma(struct drm_device *dev, return 0; } -static s16 chv_prepare_csc_coeff(s64 csc_value)As mentioned previously, this should be part of the respective patch.
Agree. Looks like diff is messing up a bit. Will take care of this.
Thats for GAMMA_MAX, not for CSC_MAX. Or you mean the whole (1 << CSC_MAX_VALS -1) to be replaced with GET/SET bits ?+static uint32_t bdw_prepare_csc_coeff(int64_t coeff) +{ + uint32_t reg_val, ls_bit_pos, exponent_bits, sign_bit = 0; + int32_t mantissa; + uint64_t abs_coeff; + + coeff = min_t(int64_t, coeff, BDW_CSC_COEFF_MAX_VAL); + coeff = max_t(int64_t, coeff, BDW_CSC_COEFF_MIN_VAL); + + abs_coeff = abs(coeff); + if (abs_coeff < (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 3)) { + /* abs_coeff < 0.125 */ + exponent_bits = 3; + ls_bit_pos = 19; + } else if (abs_coeff >= (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 3) && + abs_coeff < (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 2)) { + /* abs_coeff >= 0.125 && val < 0.25 */ + exponent_bits = 2; + ls_bit_pos = 20; + } else if (abs_coeff >= (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 2) + && abs_coeff < (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 1)) { + /* abs_coeff >= 0.25 && val < 0.5 */ + exponent_bits = 1; + ls_bit_pos = 21; + } else if (abs_coeff >= (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL >> 1) + && abs_coeff < BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL) { + /* abs_coeff >= 0.5 && val < 1.0 */ + exponent_bits = 0; + ls_bit_pos = 22; + } else if (abs_coeff >= BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL && + abs_coeff < (BDW_CSC_COEFF_UNITY_VAL << 1)) { + /* abs_coeff >= 1.0 && val < 2.0 */ + exponent_bits = 7; + ls_bit_pos = 23; + } else { + /* abs_coeff >= 2.0 && val < 4.0 */ + exponent_bits = 6; + ls_bit_pos = 24; + } + + mantissa = GET_BITS_ROUNDOFF(abs_coeff, ls_bit_pos, CSC_MAX_VALS); + if (coeff < 0) { + sign_bit = 1; + mantissa = -mantissa; + mantissa &= ((1 << CSC_MAX_VALS) - 1);I think there is a macro for this already ?
+ } + + reg_val = 0; + SET_BITS(reg_val, exponent_bits, 12, 3); + SET_BITS(reg_val, mantissa, 3, 9); + SET_BITS(reg_val, sign_bit, 15, 1); + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("CSC: reg_val=0x%x\n", reg_val); + return reg_val; +} + +int bdw_set_csc(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_property_blob *blob, + struct drm_crtc *crtc) +{The function should be static ?
Agree.
Regards, Emil
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
