Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 1/3] drm: Rename lut check functions to lut channel checks

From: Harry Wentland
Date: Fri Oct 29 2021 - 09:58:40 EST

Next message: Neil Armstrong: "[PATCH] drm/bridge: dw-hdmi: handle ELD when DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR"
Previous message: Nicolas Toromanoff: "[PATCH 8/8] crypto: stm32/cryp - reorder hw initialization"
In reply to: Sean Paul: "Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 1/3] drm: Rename lut check functions to lut channel checks"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 2021-10-29 09:43, Sean Paul wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 11:03:54PM -0400, Mark Yacoub wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 8:42 PM Sean Paul <sean@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 03:21:00PM -0400, Mark Yacoub wrote:
>>>> From: Mark Yacoub <markyacoub@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> [Why]
>>>> This function and enum do not do generic checking on the luts but they
>>>> test color channels in the LUTs.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure there's anything inherently specific to channels, it seems like
>>> one could add a new test to reflect a HW limitation and it would fit pretty well
>>> in the lut check function. I wonder if it would be better to expose the types of
>>> tests required by the crtc such that the atomic_check could also do the test?
>>>
>> So the tests of the color are pretty unique to intel devices, no other
>> device is using it so I didn't think it adds a lot of benefit adding
>> it to the lut check. However, it's still in DRM because technically it
>> can be supported by any driver. But once it is, the driver will have
>> to expose the tests it wants so we can check it in atomic_check. but
>> given that no one does expose any test but intel, i just left it only
>> used by them.
>>
>
> Yeah, understood. Regardless of that, the spirit of the function is not specific
> to the color channels in the LUT, so renaming as channels_check is probably not
> the correct fix. I'd probably lean towards stuffing this in i915 as a
> driver-specific check instead of renaming it.
>

The checks could be generally useful for other drivers. I assume a lot
of HW wants the LUT to be non-decreasing and there might be other HW
out there that implements LUTs with a single channel that applies to
all colors. Since this is only used by i915 at the moment I don't have
a strong opinion about keeping it in DRM core or stuffing it into i915.

I agree with Sean that this function isn't specifically about color
channels. The function seems to be designed as a generic check for LUTs,
which is why the "tests" flag is passed in. DRM_COLOR_LUT_EQUAL_CHANNELS
is checking the channels but DRM_COLOR_LUT_NON_DECREASING doesn't
particularly have anything to do with the channels.

Harry

> Sean
>
>>> Sean
>>>
>>>> Keeping the name explicit as more generic LUT checks will follow.
>>>>
>>>> Tested on Eldrid ChromeOS (TGL).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Yacoub <markyacoub@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_color_mgmt.c | 12 ++++++------
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c | 10 +++++-----
>>>> include/drm/drm_color_mgmt.h | 7 ++++---
>>>> 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_color_mgmt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_color_mgmt.c
>>>> index bb14f488c8f6c..6f4e04746d90f 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_color_mgmt.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_color_mgmt.c
>>>> @@ -585,17 +585,17 @@ int drm_plane_create_color_properties(struct drm_plane *plane,
>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_plane_create_color_properties);
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> - * drm_color_lut_check - check validity of lookup table
>>>> + * drm_color_lut_channels_check - check validity of the channels in the lookup table
>>>> * @lut: property blob containing LUT to check
>>>> * @tests: bitmask of tests to run
>>>> *
>>>> - * Helper to check whether a userspace-provided lookup table is valid and
>>>> - * satisfies hardware requirements. Drivers pass a bitmask indicating which of
>>>> - * the tests in &drm_color_lut_tests should be performed.
>>>> + * Helper to check whether each color channel of userspace-provided lookup table is valid and
>>>> + * satisfies hardware requirements. Drivers pass a bitmask indicating which of in
>>>> + * &drm_color_lut_channels_tests should be performed.
>>>> *
>>>> * Returns 0 on success, -EINVAL on failure.
>>>> */
>>>> -int drm_color_lut_check(const struct drm_property_blob *lut, u32 tests)
>>>> +int drm_color_lut_channels_check(const struct drm_property_blob *lut, u32 tests)
>>>> {
>>>> const struct drm_color_lut *entry;
>>>> int i;
>>>> @@ -625,4 +625,4 @@ int drm_color_lut_check(const struct drm_property_blob *lut, u32 tests)
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_color_lut_check);
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_color_lut_channels_check);
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c
>>>> index dab892d2251ba..4bb1bc76c4de9 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c
>>>> @@ -1285,7 +1285,7 @@ static int check_luts(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>>> const struct drm_property_blob *gamma_lut = crtc_state->hw.gamma_lut;
>>>> const struct drm_property_blob *degamma_lut = crtc_state->hw.degamma_lut;
>>>> int gamma_length, degamma_length;
>>>> - u32 gamma_tests, degamma_tests;
>>>> + u32 gamma_channels_tests, degamma_channels_tests;
>>>>
>>>> /* Always allow legacy gamma LUT with no further checking. */
>>>> if (crtc_state_is_legacy_gamma(crtc_state))
>>>> @@ -1300,15 +1300,15 @@ static int check_luts(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
>>>>
>>>> degamma_length = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.degamma_lut_size;
>>>> gamma_length = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.gamma_lut_size;
>>>> - degamma_tests = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.degamma_lut_tests;
>>>> - gamma_tests = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.gamma_lut_tests;
>>>> + degamma_channels_tests = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.degamma_lut_tests;
>>>> + gamma_channels_tests = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->color.gamma_lut_tests;
>>>>
>>>> if (check_lut_size(degamma_lut, degamma_length) ||
>>>> check_lut_size(gamma_lut, gamma_length))
>>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> - if (drm_color_lut_check(degamma_lut, degamma_tests) ||
>>>> - drm_color_lut_check(gamma_lut, gamma_tests))
>>>> + if (drm_color_lut_channels_check(degamma_lut, degamma_channels_tests) ||
>>>> + drm_color_lut_channels_check(gamma_lut, gamma_channels_tests))
>>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_color_mgmt.h b/include/drm/drm_color_mgmt.h
>>>> index 81c298488b0c8..cb1bf361ad3e3 100644
>>>> --- a/include/drm/drm_color_mgmt.h
>>>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_color_mgmt.h
>>>> @@ -94,12 +94,12 @@ int drm_plane_create_color_properties(struct drm_plane *plane,
>>>> enum drm_color_range default_range);
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> - * enum drm_color_lut_tests - hw-specific LUT tests to perform
>>>> + * enum drm_color_lut_channels_tests - hw-specific LUT tests to perform
>>>> *
>>>> * The drm_color_lut_check() function takes a bitmask of the values here to
>>>> * determine which tests to apply to a userspace-provided LUT.
>>>> */
>>>> -enum drm_color_lut_tests {
>>>> +enum drm_color_lut_channels_tests {
>>>> /**
>>>> * @DRM_COLOR_LUT_EQUAL_CHANNELS:
>>>> *
>>>> @@ -119,5 +119,6 @@ enum drm_color_lut_tests {
>>>> DRM_COLOR_LUT_NON_DECREASING = BIT(1),
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> -int drm_color_lut_check(const struct drm_property_blob *lut, u32 tests);
>>>> +int drm_color_lut_channels_check(const struct drm_property_blob *lut,
>>>> + u32 tests);
>>>> #endif
>>>> --
>>>> 2.33.0.1079.g6e70778dc9-goog
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sean Paul, Software Engineer, Google / Chromium OS
>

Next message: Neil Armstrong: "[PATCH] drm/bridge: dw-hdmi: handle ELD when DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR"
Previous message: Nicolas Toromanoff: "[PATCH 8/8] crypto: stm32/cryp - reorder hw initialization"
In reply to: Sean Paul: "Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 1/3] drm: Rename lut check functions to lut channel checks"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]