On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 12:08 -0700, Steve Longerbeam wrote: > > On 03/19/2017 08:22 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 08:53:18PM -0800, Steve Longerbeam wrote: > >> From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> The csi_try_crop call in set_fmt should compare the cropping rectangle > >> to the currently set input format, not to the previous input format. > > Are we really sure that the cropping support is implemented correctly? > > > > I came across this while looking at what we're doing with the > > V4L2_SEL_FLAG_KEEP_CONFIG flag. > > > > Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/dev-subdev.rst defines the behaviour of > > the user API, and "Order of configuration and format propagation" says: > > > > The coordinates to a step always refer to the actual size of the > > previous step. The exception to this rule is the source compose > > rectangle, which refers to the sink compose bounds rectangle --- if it > > is supported by the hardware. > > > > 1. Sink pad format. The user configures the sink pad format. This format > > defines the parameters of the image the entity receives through the > > pad for further processing. > > > > 2. Sink pad actual crop selection. The sink pad crop defines the crop > > performed to the sink pad format. > > > > 3. Sink pad actual compose selection. The size of the sink pad compose > > rectangle defines the scaling ratio compared to the size of the sink > > pad crop rectangle. The location of the compose rectangle specifies > > the location of the actual sink compose rectangle in the sink compose > > bounds rectangle. > > > > 4. Source pad actual crop selection. Crop on the source pad defines crop > > performed to the image in the sink compose bounds rectangle. > > > > 5. Source pad format. The source pad format defines the output pixel > > format of the subdev, as well as the other parameters with the > > exception of the image width and height. Width and height are defined > > by the size of the source pad actual crop selection. > > > > Accessing any of the above rectangles not supported by the subdev will > > return ``EINVAL``. Any rectangle referring to a previous unsupported > > rectangle coordinates will instead refer to the previous supported > > rectangle. For example, if sink crop is not supported, the compose > > selection will refer to the sink pad format dimensions instead. > > > > Note step 3 above: scaling is defined by the ratio of the _sink_ crop > > rectangle to the _sink_ compose rectangle. The above paragraph suggests we skip any rectangles that are not supported. In our case that would be 3. and 4., since the CSI can't compose into a larger frame. I hadn't realised that the crop selection currently happens on the source pad. The hardware actually only supports cropping of the input (the crop rectangle we write into the window registers are before downscaling). So the crop rectangle should be moved to the sink pad. > > So, lets say that the camera produces a 1280x720 image, and the sink > > pad format is configured with 1280x720. That's step 1. > > > > The sink crop operates within that rectangle, cropping it to an area. > > Let's say we're only interested in its centre, so we'd chose 640x360 > > with the top-left as 320,180. This is step 2. >> > > Then, if we want to down-scale by a factor of two, we'd set the sink > > compose selection to 320x180. Except when composing is not supported. If the sink compose and source crop rectangles are not supported, the source pad format takes their place in determining the scaling output resolution. At least that's how I read the documentation. > > This seems to be at odds with how the scaling is done in CSI at > > present: the selection implementations all reject attempts to > > configure the sink pad, instead only supporting crop rectangles on > > the source, > > Correct. Currently cropping is only supported at the source pad > (step 4). > > Initially the CSI didn't support down-scaling, so step 3 is not supported, > so the sink pad format/crop selection rectangle/crop compose rectangle > are collapsed into the same sink pad format rectangle. > > Philipp later added support for /2 downscaling, but we didn't put this in > the correct API, looks like this needs to move into the selection API at > step 3 (sink pad compose rectangle). I am not sure about this. Wouldn't moving the input crop to the sink pad be enough? If we added support for the sink pad compose rectangle, that wouldn't actually allow to compose the CSI output into a larger frame. Since the subdevice can't compose, I'd leave the sink compose rectangle disabled. > > and we use the source crop rectangle to define the > > down-scaling. We use the source pad format to define the downscaling relative to the source crop rectangle (which is wrong, it should be relative to the sink crop rectangle). > Yes. And maybe there is nothing wrong with that, because scaling is also > defined by the source/sink _format_ ratios (if I'm not mistaken), so looking > at this another way, we're just defining scaling in the CSI via another > legal API. I didn't touch the crop rectangle at all, just setting the input resolution on the sink pad and the desired output resolution on the source pad should work. regards Philipp _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
