Hi Sakari, and Tomasz as I have a remark/question for you :-) On 21/09/2021 13:07, Sakari Ailus wrote: > Hi Jean-Michel --- and Bingbu and Tianshu, > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 07:25:04PM +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote: >> While playing with low resolutions for the grid, it appeared that >> height_per_slice is not initialised if we are not using both stripes for >> the calculations. This pattern occurs three times: >> - for the awb_fr processing block >> - for the af processing block >> - for the awb processing block >> >> The idea of this small portion of code is to reduce complexity in >> loading the statistics, it could be done also when only one stripe is >> used. Fix it by getting this initialisation code outside of the else() >> test case. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jean-Michel Hautbois <jeanmichel.hautbois@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/staging/media/ipu3/ipu3-css-params.c | 44 ++++++++++---------- >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/ipu3/ipu3-css-params.c b/drivers/staging/media/ipu3/ipu3-css-params.c >> index e9d6bd9e9332..05da7dbdca78 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/media/ipu3/ipu3-css-params.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/ipu3/ipu3-css-params.c >> @@ -2428,16 +2428,16 @@ int imgu_css_cfg_acc(struct imgu_css *css, unsigned int pipe, >> acc->awb_fr.stripes[1].grid_cfg.width, >> b_w_log2); >> acc->awb_fr.stripes[1].grid_cfg.x_end = end; >> - >> - /* >> - * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading >> - * statistics fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both >> - * stripes. >> - */ >> - for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> - acc->awb_fr.stripes[i].grid_cfg.height_per_slice = 1; >> } >> >> + /* >> + * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading >> + * statistics fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both >> + * stripes. >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> + acc->awb_fr.stripes[i].grid_cfg.height_per_slice = 1; >> + >> if (imgu_css_awb_fr_ops_calc(css, pipe, &acc->awb_fr)) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> @@ -2591,15 +2591,15 @@ int imgu_css_cfg_acc(struct imgu_css *css, unsigned int pipe, >> imgu_css_grid_end(acc->af.stripes[1].grid_cfg.x_start, >> acc->af.stripes[1].grid_cfg.width, >> b_w_log2); >> - >> - /* >> - * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading statistics >> - * fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both stripes >> - */ >> - for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> - acc->af.stripes[i].grid_cfg.height_per_slice = 1; >> } >> >> + /* >> + * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading statistics >> + * fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both stripes >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> + acc->af.stripes[i].grid_cfg.height_per_slice = 1; >> + >> if (imgu_css_af_ops_calc(css, pipe, &acc->af)) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> @@ -2660,15 +2660,15 @@ int imgu_css_cfg_acc(struct imgu_css *css, unsigned int pipe, >> imgu_css_grid_end(acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.x_start, >> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.width, >> b_w_log2); >> - >> - /* >> - * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading statistics >> - * fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both stripes >> - */ >> - for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> - acc->awb.stripes[i].grid.height_per_slice = 1; >> } >> >> + /* >> + * To reduce complexity of debubbling and loading statistics >> + * fix grid_height_per_slice to 1 for both stripes >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < stripes; i++) >> + acc->awb.stripes[i].grid.height_per_slice = 1; >> + >> if (imgu_css_awb_ops_calc(css, pipe, &acc->awb)) >> return -EINVAL; >> > > While it seems like a sensible idea to initialise arguments to firmware, does this have an > effect on the statistics format? If so, can the existing user space cope > with that? To try and figure that out, we have tested several grid configurations and inspected the captured statistics. We have converted the statistics in an image, rendering each cell as a pixel whose red, green and blue components are the cell's red, green and blue averages. This turned out to be a very effectice tool to quickly visualize AWB statistics. We have made a lot of tests with different output resolutions, from a small one up to the full-scale one. Here is one example of a statistics output with a ViewFinder configured as 1920x1280, with a BDS output configuration set to 2304x1536 (sensor is 2592x1944). Without the patch, configuring a 79x45 grid of 16x16 cells we obtain the image: https://pasteboard.co/g4nC4fHjbVER.png. We can notice a weird padding every two lines and it seems to be missing half of the frame. With the patch applied, the same configuration gives us the image: https://pasteboard.co/rzap6axIvVdu.png We can clearly see the one padding pixel on the right, and the frame is all there, as expected. Tomasz: We're concerned that this patch may have an impact on the ChromeOS Intel Camera HAL with the IPU3. Is it possible for someone to review and test this please? Thanks, JM
