________________________ BRs, Bingbu Cao > -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Michel Hautbois <jeanmichel.hautbois@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 7:57 PM > To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Cao, Bingbu > <bingbu.cao@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; tfiga@xxxxxxxxxx; linux- > media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Qiu, Tian Shu <tian.shu.qiu@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: staging: ipu3-imgu: Initialise > height_per_slice in the stripes > > Hi Bingbu, Laurent, > > On 23/09/2021 12:49, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Bingbu, > > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:29:33AM +0000, Cao, Bingbu wrote: > >> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 5:46 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 09:06:32AM +0000, Cao, Bingbu wrote: > >>>> Jean-Michel, > >>>> > >>>> Firstly, the .height_per_slice could be 0 if your .grid.width > >>>> larger than 32. > >>> > >>> Which .height_per_slice are you talking about ? A field of that name > >>> exists in both ipu3_uapi_acc_param.awb.config.grid and struct > >>> ipu3_uapi_grid_config and imgu_abi_awb_config.stripes.grid. > >>> > >>> They are both computed by the driver, in imgu_css_cfg_acc(). The > >>> former is set to > >>> > >>> acc->awb.config.grid.height_per_slice = > >>> IMGU_ABI_AWB_MAX_CELLS_PER_SET / acc->awb.config.grid.width, > >>> > >>> IMGU_ABI_AWB_MAX_CELLS_PER_SET is equal to 160, so it can only be 0 > >>> if grid.width > 160, which is invalid. > >> > >> For awb_fr and af, it could be 0 if the .config.grid_cfg.width > 32. > > > > Indeed, my bad. I was focussing on the AWB statistics. > > > > What are the implications of a height_per_slice value of 0 ? > > > > While we are on this topic, what is a "slice" ? Does it matter for the > > user, as in does it have an impact on the statistics values, or on how > > they're arranged in memory, or is it an implementation detail of the > > firmware that has no consequence on what can be seen by the user ? > > (The "user" here is the code that reads the statistics in userspace). > > > >>>> From your configuration, looks like something wrong in the stripe > >>>> configuration cause not entering the 2 stripes branch. > >>> > >>> Why is that ? Isn't it valid for a grid configuration to use a > >>> single stripe, if the image is small enough, or if the grid only > >>> covers the left part of the image ? > >>> > >>>> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 1:54 PM, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote: > >>>>> On 22/09/2021 06:33, Cao, Bingbu wrote: > >>>>>> Jean-Michel, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks for you patch. > >>>>>> What is the value of .config.grid_cfg.width for your low > resolutions? > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't know if a 1920x1280 output is a low resolution, but the > >>>>> grid is configured as: > >>>>> - grid_cfg.width = 79 > >>>>> - grid_cfg.height = 24 > >>>>> - grid_cfg.block_width_log2 = 4 > >>>>> - grid_cfg.block_height_log2 = 6 > >>>>> > >>>>> Here is a full debug output of the AWB part in imgu_css_cfg_acc(): > >>>>> > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[0].width: 1280 > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[0].height: 1536 > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[0].offset: 0 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[0].width: 1280 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[0].height: 1536 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[0].offset: 0 > >>>>> acc->acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.width: 79 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.block_width_log2: 4 > >>>>> acc->acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.height: 24 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.block_height_log2: 6 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.x_start: 0 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.x_end: 1263 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.y_start: 0 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[0].grid.y_end: 1535 > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[1].width: 1280 > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[1].height: 1536 > >>>>> acc->stripe.down_scaled_stripes[1].offset: 1024 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[1].width: 1280 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[1].height: 1536 > >>>>> acc->stripe.bds_out_stripes[1].offset: 1024 > >>>>> acc->acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.width: 79 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.block_width_log2: 4 > >>>>> acc->acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.height: 24 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.block_height_log2: 6 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.x_start: 0 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.x_end: 1263 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.y_start: 0 > >>>>> acc->awb.stripes[1].grid.y_end: 1535 > >> > >> Are these dumps from 1920x1280 output? > > > > Jean-Michel, could you comment on this ? > > > > Note that the grid is configured with 79 cells of 16 pixels, covering > > 1264 pixels horizontally. That's not the full image for a 1920 pixels > > output, and will probably not be done in practice, but there's nothing > > preventing the grid from covering part of the image only. > > > > It is a dump for a 1920x1280 output. > If it can help, the configuration set in ImgU is: > IF: 2592x1728 > BDS: 2304x1536 > GDC: 1920x1280 Jean-Michel, It looks you are trying to use 2 stripes and the grid size is 2528x1536, and the awb.config.grid.x_end should be larger than the bds_out_stripes[0].width - 10, it would not hit any 1 stripe condition. could you also share your awb.config.grid? > > > >>>>> This has been outputted with: https://paste.debian.net/1212791/ > >>>>> > >>>>> The examples I gave before were 1280x720 output and not 1920x1080, > >>>>> here are they: > >>>>> - without the patch: https://pasteboard.co/hHo4QkVUSk8e.png > >>>>> - with the patch: https://pasteboard.co/YUGUvS5tD0bo.png > >>>>> > >>>>> As you can see we have the same behaviour. > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Tuesday, September 21, 2021 10:34 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 03:04:37PM +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois > wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 21/09/2021 13:07, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>>>>>>>> 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? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> As shown by the images above, this is a real fix. It only > >>>>>>> affects grid configurations that use a single stripe (left or > >>>>>>> right), so either "small" resolutions (less than 1280 pixels at > >>>>>>> the BDS output if I recall correctly), or grid configurations > >>>>>>> that span the left part of the image with higher resolutions. > >>>>>>> The latter is probably unlikely. For the former, it may affect > >>>>>>> the binary library, especially if it includes a workaround for > the bug. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Still, this change is good I believe, so it should be upstreamed. > >
