Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Add Rockchip RGA support

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Montag, 28. März 2016, 22:35:36 schrieb Emil Velikov:
> On 28 March 2016 at 19:44, Heiko Stübner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Am Montag, 28. März 2016, 13:21:02 schrieb Emil Velikov:
> >> On 22 March 2016 at 00:42, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Hi Yakir,
> >> > 
> >> > Am Montag, 21. März 2016, 20:17:46 schrieb Yakir Yang:
> >> >> On 03/21/2016 07:29 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> >> >> > Am Montag, 21. März 2016, 17:28:38 schrieb Yakir Yang:
> >> >> >> This patch set would add the RGA direct rendering based 2d graphics
> >> >> >> acceleration module.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > very cool to see that.
> >> >> 
> >> >> ;)
> >> >> 
> >> >> >> This patch set is based on git repository below:
> >> >> >> git://people.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux drm-next
> >> >> >> commit id: 568d7c764ae01f3706085ac8f0d8a8ac7e826bd7
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> And the RGA driver is based on Exynos G2D driver, it only manages
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> command lists received from user, so user should make the command
> >> >> >> list
> >> >> >> to data and registers needed by operation to use.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> I have prepared an userspace demo application for testing:
> >> >> >>    https://github.com/yakir-Yang/libdrm-rockchip
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> That is a rockchip libdrm library, and I have write a simple test
> >> >> >> case
> >> >> >> "rockchip_rga_test" that would test the below RGA features:
> >> >> >> - solid
> >> >> >> - copy
> >> >> >> - rotation
> >> >> >> - flip
> >> >> >> - window clip
> >> >> >> - dithering
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Did you submit your libdrm changes as well?
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Userspace-interfaces need to be stable so the other side must also
> >> >> > get
> >> >> > accepted - even before the kernel change if I remember correctly.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Got it, and I just saw exynos_fimg2d already landed at mainline
> >> >> libdrm.
> >> >> But I don't find the way to submit patches to libdrm, would you like
> >> >> share some helps here ;)
> >> > 
> >> > Looking at the libdrm sources on cgit.freedesktop.org, I did not find
> >> > any
> >> > specific manual on submitting patches.
> >> > 
> >> > But looking at the dri-list archive, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is
> >> > the
> >> > right list and looking at the libdrm history it looks like Emil Velikov
> >> > <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> seems to be doing maintenance-stuff in
> >> > libdrm.
> >> > And as a 3rd recipient, please also include the linux-rockchip list.
> >> > 
> >> > @Emil, please shout if I read that wrong :-)
> >> 
> >> You got it spot on Heiko. There are a few notes though...
> >> 
> >> As one reuses the existing hardware/IP block, it would be better to
> >> avoid copy/pasting code around.
> >> 
> >> Namely:
> >>  - (if possible) factor out the exynos g2d kernel functionality to a
> >> 
> >> separate kernel module and wire up the rockhip (via dt ?) to use it
> >> 
> >>  - factor out the g2d specifics out of exynos_drm.h (into
> >> 
> >> exynos_g2d_drm.h perhaps ?) and make sure exynos_drm.h includes the
> >> new header
> > 
> > I think the IP blocks themself are quite different between Rockchip's RGA
> > and Samsung's g2d and I guess the similarities are more along the lines
> > on how that gets integrated into the respective drm driver and userspace.
> In this case, the exynos_g2d_drm.h seems like a good idea. As I'm
> obviously biased, it's better to check how others feel on the topic.
> 
> >>  - if neither of these are possible, then please ensure that the new
> >> 
> >> header uses correct types (see the docs [1]), use MIT/X11 license (if
> >> possible) and link where upstream userspace is happy with the
> >> interface (ideally more than a simple test app like libdrm)
> >> These might sound like an overkill, although getting UAPI right and
> >> maintaining it forever forces us to do so.
> > 
> > As for a real-world usecase, maybe the armsoc xserver might be somewhat
> > easy to use. While the core changes I did are in the core project
> > already, I'm still keeping the actual Rockchip support separate [0] due
> > to the not-yet- resolved create_gem ioctl.
> > 
> > Anyway, the armsoc xserver has some exa implementation hooks were I guess
> > it might be relatively easy to hook up soc-specific things.
> 
> Ouch the armsoc ddx... Last time I've checked it felt like a place
> where everyone is doing his own thing, with no actual reviews and/or
> maintainer.

The development rate is pretty low and maintainership is unclear but the per-
soc voodoo is quite limited to the GEM-creation and everything else seems 
somewhat nice when compared for example to the older versions of the ddx.


> Iirc most/all of it's functionality was achievable with
> modesetting ddx (with or without glamor) ? I take it that things have
> changed and/or I misunderstood something ?

I don't really understand that whole stack or how xservers work on a whole ;-)
I was merely able to make the _binary_ mali-driver work with this one and 
remembered that there were hooks for future per-soc exa functions.

I guess for that glamor thing you'd need an actual gpu driver and not that 
libGL-override voodoo those crazy binary drivers do.

At least the modesetting ddx didn't like mali-binary-driver.


Heiko