[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Support NV12 in rotated GGTT mapping
Daniel Vetter
daniel at ffwll.ch
Mon Sep 28 01:37:24 PDT 2015
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 02:29:59PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:44:44AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >
> > On 09/24/2015 05:35 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:45:34AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> > >>
> > >> Just adding the rotated UV plane at the end of the rotated Y plane.
> > >>
> > >> v2: Rebase.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h | 3 +++
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> > >> 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > >> index 59c934fb9230..2df9d16dcefd 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > >> @@ -3272,10 +3272,13 @@ intel_rotate_fb_obj_pages(struct i915_ggtt_view *ggtt_view,
> > >> {
> > >> struct intel_rotation_info *rot_info = &ggtt_view->rotation_info;
> > >> unsigned int size_pages = rot_info->size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > >> + unsigned int size_pages_uv;
> > >> struct sg_page_iter sg_iter;
> > >> unsigned long i;
> > >> dma_addr_t *page_addr_list;
> > >> struct sg_table *st;
> > >> + unsigned int uv_start_page;
> > >> + struct scatterlist *sg;
> > >> int ret = -ENOMEM;
> > >>
> > >> /* Allocate a temporary list of source pages for random access. */
> > >> @@ -3284,12 +3287,18 @@ intel_rotate_fb_obj_pages(struct i915_ggtt_view *ggtt_view,
> > >> if (!page_addr_list)
> > >> return ERR_PTR(ret);
> > >>
> > >> + /* Account for UV plane with NV12. */
> > >> + if (rot_info->pixel_format == DRM_FORMAT_NV12)
> > >> + size_pages_uv = rot_info->size_uv >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > >> + else
> > >> + size_pages_uv = 0;
> > >> +
> > >> /* Allocate target SG list. */
> > >> st = kmalloc(sizeof(*st), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >> if (!st)
> > >> goto err_st_alloc;
> > >>
> > >> - ret = sg_alloc_table(st, size_pages, GFP_KERNEL);
> > >> + ret = sg_alloc_table(st, size_pages + size_pages_uv, GFP_KERNEL);
> > >> if (ret)
> > >> goto err_sg_alloc;
> > >>
> > >> @@ -3301,15 +3310,30 @@ intel_rotate_fb_obj_pages(struct i915_ggtt_view *ggtt_view,
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> /* Rotate the pages. */
> > >> - rotate_pages(page_addr_list, 0,
> > >> + sg = rotate_pages(page_addr_list, 0,
> > >> rot_info->width_pages, rot_info->height_pages,
> > >> st, NULL);
> > >>
> > >> + /* Append the UV plane if NV12. */
> > >> + if (rot_info->pixel_format == DRM_FORMAT_NV12) {
> > >> + uv_start_page = size_pages;
> > >> +
> > >> + /* Check for tile-row un-alignment. */
> > >> + if (offset_in_page(rot_info->uv_offset))
> > >> + uv_start_page--;
> > >> +
> > >> + rotate_pages(page_addr_list, uv_start_page,
> > >> + rot_info->width_pages_uv,
> > >> + rot_info->height_pages_uv,
> > >> + st, sg);
> > >> + }
> > >> +
> > >> DRM_DEBUG_KMS(
> > >> - "Created rotated page mapping for object size %zu (pitch=%u, height=%u, pixel_format=0x%x, %ux%u tiles, %u pages).\n",
> > >> + "Created rotated page mapping for object size %zu (pitch=%u, height=%u, pixel_format=0x%x, %ux%u tiles, %u pages (%u plane 0)).\n",
> > >> obj->base.size, rot_info->pitch, rot_info->height,
> > >> rot_info->pixel_format, rot_info->width_pages,
> > >> - rot_info->height_pages, size_pages);
> > >> + rot_info->height_pages, size_pages + size_pages_uv,
> > >> + size_pages);
> > >>
> > >> drm_free_large(page_addr_list);
> > >>
> > >> @@ -3321,10 +3345,11 @@ err_st_alloc:
> > >> drm_free_large(page_addr_list);
> > >>
> > >> DRM_DEBUG_KMS(
> > >> - "Failed to create rotated mapping for object size %zu! (%d) (pitch=%u, height=%u, pixel_format=0x%x, %ux%u tiles, %u pages)\n",
> > >> + "Failed to create rotated mapping for object size %zu! (%d) (pitch=%u, height=%u, pixel_format=0x%x, %ux%u tiles, %u pages (%u plane 0))\n",
> > >> obj->base.size, ret, rot_info->pitch, rot_info->height,
> > >> rot_info->pixel_format, rot_info->width_pages,
> > >> - rot_info->height_pages, size_pages);
> > >> + rot_info->height_pages, size_pages + size_pages_uv,
> > >> + size_pages);
> > >> return ERR_PTR(ret);
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> > >> index 82750073d5b3..197183d5c543 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h
> > >> @@ -138,10 +138,13 @@ enum i915_ggtt_view_type {
> > >> struct intel_rotation_info {
> > >> unsigned int height;
> > >> unsigned int pitch;
> > >> + unsigned int uv_offset;
> > >> uint32_t pixel_format;
> > >> uint64_t fb_modifier;
> > >> unsigned int width_pages, height_pages;
> > >> uint64_t size;
> > >> + unsigned int width_pages_uv, height_pages_uv;
> > >> + uint64_t size_uv;
> > >> };
> > >>
> > >> struct i915_ggtt_view {
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > >> index e19b8e699c00..2db7cc42539c 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > >> @@ -2263,6 +2263,7 @@ intel_fill_fb_ggtt_view(struct i915_ggtt_view *view, struct drm_framebuffer *fb,
> > >> info->height = fb->height;
> > >> info->pixel_format = fb->pixel_format;
> > >> info->pitch = fb->pitches[0];
> > >> + info->uv_offset = fb->offsets[1];
> > >
> > > OK, so this already came up a bit when I was looking at Chandra's stuff,
> > > but we really have to define what fb->offsets[] means now.
> > >
> > > On one hand, it would be very logical for it to be a raw byte offset
> > > into the object where the fb starts. But on the other hand that perhaps
> > > makes it a bit more difficult for userspace to compute offsets[1] for
> > > the CbCr plane. Also we have fences to consider, and currently we even
> > > require that the fence stride matches the fb stride, even though that
> > > may not really be necessary. So maybe it should be the linear offset
> > > instead.
> > >
> > > So which way should we go?
> >
> > No idea, I'm afraid I don't have the wide enough knowledge on this one
> > to contribute hugely.
> >
> > Why would it be difficult for userspace to compute a byte offset to the
> > UV plane though? Presumably it had to know it already to have rendered
> > anything - otherwise why and how would it be giving this frame buffer to
> > the kernel?
>
> Well, it's not difficult per say, but it would have to know the tile
> dimensions to do it. When using a linear offset, the tile dimensions are
> mostly meaningless, although some of the hw restrictions (stride must be
> tile aligned, and CbCr plane must start at somewhat aligned offset
> at least sometimes) does blow a hole to that theory a bit.
>
> I suppose it's not really a huge deal which way we go, we just have to
> pick one and stick with it, and document it.
Hm I kinda assumed that for tiled layouts plane offsets must be
tile-aligned for everyone. Since tiling is now a separate part with the fb
modifiers I'd go with using it as the linear offset. But definitely needs
to be documented with a kerneldoc pathc somewhere ...
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list