| Message ID | 9b4f80f213b50959d168e6f22b21ee784fe26da5.1486031436.git-series.maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/2] drm/cma-helper: Add multi buffer support for cma fbdev | expand |
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:31:56AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > From: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > > This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma fbdev. > Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > > Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android > devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these > Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need > some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So multi > buffer for fbdev is needed. > > Signed-off-by: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > [s.christ@phytec.de: Picking patch from > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/14/188] > Signed-off-by: Stefan Christ <s.christ@phytec.de> > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c | 8 +++++++- > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > index ebfe8404c25f..2ca9bb26a4e4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@ config DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > help > Choose this if you need the KMS CMA helper functions > > +config DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM > + int "Cma Fbdev Buffer Number" > + depends on DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > + default 1 > + help > + Defines the buffer number of cma fbdev. Default is one buffer. > + For double buffer please set to 2 and 3 for triple buffer. > + > source "drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/Kconfig" > > source "drivers/gpu/drm/arm/Kconfig" > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > index 81b3558302b5..e3f8b9e720a0 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > @@ -411,6 +411,12 @@ static void drm_fbdev_cma_defio_fini(struct fb_info *fbi) > kfree(fbi->fbops); > } > > +static int fbdev_num_buffers = CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM; > +module_param(fbdev_num_buffers, int, 0444); > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(fbdev_num_buffers, > + "Number of frame buffers to allocate [default=" > + __MODULE_STRING(CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM) "]"); Pure bikshed: Should this be an overallocation %? 200 for double-buffering, 100 as the default? Slightly less bikesheddy: Can't we do this in the core helpers somehow? I'd be nice if this is not cma specific. If it's not possible, I'd at least move the symbol to drm_fb_helper.c, and add some kernel-doc around it. That allows any other non-cma driver to at least implement support for this. That also has the benefit of featuring it more prominently, in our docs. Besides these bikesheds/question, looks all reasonable to me. If you can get some more acks would be great, but will merge anyway. -Daniel > + > /* > * For use in a (struct drm_fb_helper_funcs *)->fb_probe callback function that > * needs custom struct drm_framebuffer_funcs, like dirty() for deferred_io use. > @@ -437,7 +443,7 @@ int drm_fbdev_cma_create_with_funcs(struct drm_fb_helper *helper, > bytes_per_pixel = DIV_ROUND_UP(sizes->surface_bpp, 8); > > mode_cmd.width = sizes->surface_width; > - mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height; > + mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height * fbdev_num_buffers; > mode_cmd.pitches[0] = sizes->surface_width * bytes_per_pixel; > mode_cmd.pixel_format = drm_mode_legacy_fb_format(sizes->surface_bpp, > sizes->surface_depth); > -- > git-series 0.8.11 > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Hi Daniel, On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 06:04:38PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:31:56AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > From: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > > > > This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma fbdev. > > Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > > > > Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android > > devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these > > Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need > > some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So multi > > buffer for fbdev is needed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > > [s.christ@phytec.de: Picking patch from > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/14/188] > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Christ <s.christ@phytec.de> > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c | 8 +++++++- > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > > index ebfe8404c25f..2ca9bb26a4e4 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > > @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@ config DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > > help > > Choose this if you need the KMS CMA helper functions > > > > +config DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM > > + int "Cma Fbdev Buffer Number" > > + depends on DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > > + default 1 > > + help > > + Defines the buffer number of cma fbdev. Default is one buffer. > > + For double buffer please set to 2 and 3 for triple buffer. > > + > > source "drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/Kconfig" > > > > source "drivers/gpu/drm/arm/Kconfig" > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > > index 81b3558302b5..e3f8b9e720a0 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > > @@ -411,6 +411,12 @@ static void drm_fbdev_cma_defio_fini(struct fb_info *fbi) > > kfree(fbi->fbops); > > } > > > > +static int fbdev_num_buffers = CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM; > > +module_param(fbdev_num_buffers, int, 0444); > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(fbdev_num_buffers, > > + "Number of frame buffers to allocate [default=" > > + __MODULE_STRING(CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM) "]"); > > Pure bikshed: Should this be an overallocation %? 200 for > double-buffering, 100 as the default? I'm not against it, but would it make sense to allocate something like 120% of a buffer? > Slightly less bikesheddy: Can't we do this in the core helpers somehow? I guess that would move it to drm_fb_helper_single_fb_probe then? It makes sense. > I'd be nice if this is not cma specific. If it's not possible, I'd at > least move the symbol to drm_fb_helper.c, and add some kernel-doc around > it. That allows any other non-cma driver to at least implement support for > this. That also has the benefit of featuring it more prominently, in our > docs. I'll move it and add the kerneldoc. Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
Hi Maxime, Thank you for the patch. On Thursday 02 Feb 2017 11:31:56 Maxime Ripard wrote: > From: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > > This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma fbdev. > Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > > Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android > devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these > Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need > some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So multi > buffer for fbdev is needed. How exactly do we expect Android to move away from fbdev if we add features to the fbdev compat layer ? I'd much rather make it clear to them that fbdev is a thing from the past and that they'd better migrate now. > Signed-off-by: Xinliang Liu <xinliang.liu@linaro.org> > [s.christ@phytec.de: Picking patch from > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/14/188] > Signed-off-by: Stefan Christ <s.christ@phytec.de> > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c | 8 +++++++- > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > index ebfe8404c25f..2ca9bb26a4e4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig > @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@ config DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > help > Choose this if you need the KMS CMA helper functions > > +config DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM > + int "Cma Fbdev Buffer Number" > + depends on DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER > + default 1 > + help > + Defines the buffer number of cma fbdev. Default is one buffer. > + For double buffer please set to 2 and 3 for triple buffer. > + > source "drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/Kconfig" > > source "drivers/gpu/drm/arm/Kconfig" > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c index 81b3558302b5..e3f8b9e720a0 > 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c > @@ -411,6 +411,12 @@ static void drm_fbdev_cma_defio_fini(struct fb_info > *fbi) kfree(fbi->fbops); > } > > +static int fbdev_num_buffers = CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM; > +module_param(fbdev_num_buffers, int, 0444); > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(fbdev_num_buffers, > + "Number of frame buffers to allocate [default=" > + __MODULE_STRING(CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM) "]"); > + > /* > * For use in a (struct drm_fb_helper_funcs *)->fb_probe callback function > that * needs custom struct drm_framebuffer_funcs, like dirty() for > deferred_io use. @@ -437,7 +443,7 @@ int > drm_fbdev_cma_create_with_funcs(struct drm_fb_helper *helper, > bytes_per_pixel = DIV_ROUND_UP(sizes->surface_bpp, 8); > > mode_cmd.width = sizes->surface_width; > - mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height; > + mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height * fbdev_num_buffers; > mode_cmd.pitches[0] = sizes->surface_width * bytes_per_pixel; > mode_cmd.pixel_format = drm_mode_legacy_fb_format(sizes->surface_bpp, > sizes->surface_depth);
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:20:51AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi Maxime, > > On 13 February 2017 at 10:54, Maxime Ripard > <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 02:28:11PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Thursday 02 Feb 2017 11:31:56 Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> > This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma fbdev. > >> > Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > >> > > >> > Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android > >> > devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these > >> > Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need > >> > some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So multi > >> > buffer for fbdev is needed. > >> > >> How exactly do we expect Android to move away from fbdev if we add features to > >> the fbdev compat layer ? I'd much rather make it clear to them that fbdev is a > >> thing from the past and that they'd better migrate now. > > > > If your point is that merging this patch will slow down the Android > > move away from fbdev, I disagree with that (obviously). > > > > I don't care at all about Android on my platform of choice, but don't > > see how that merging this patch will change anything. > > > > Let's be honest, Android trees typically have thousands of patches on > > top of mainline. Do you think a simple, 15 LoC, patch will make any > > difference to vendors? If they want to stay on fbdev and have that > > feature, they'll just merge this patch, done. > > So, in that case, why not just let them do that? They'd already have > to add patches to use this, surely; we don't have anything in mainline > kernels which allows people to actually use this larger allocation. > Apart from software mmap() and using panning to do flips, but I'm > taking it as a given that people shipping Android on their devices > aren't using software rendering. I think we need to make a distinction between fbdev the subsystem in the kernel, and fbdev the uabi: - fbdev the subsystem is completely dead in upstream. I think we have full agreement on that. - fbdev the uabi isn't, and if we can get more users from fbdev based drivers to kms/atomic drivers by adding fairly simple stuff like this, I'm all for it. Which means: Yes, I fully plan to merge this, it makes sense. It even _helps_ by making fbdev-the-subsystem even deader. Making live hard for out-of-tree folks or folks with shit userspace doesn't make sense, at least if the only benefit for us is that we'll feel pure about our intentions :-) Cheers, Daniel
Hi Daniel, On Tuesday 14 Feb 2017 21:09:51 Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:20:51AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On 13 February 2017 at 10:54, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 02:28:11PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> On Thursday 02 Feb 2017 11:31:56 Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>>> This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma > >>>> fbdev. Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > >>>> > >>>> Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many Android > >>>> devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed for these > >>>> Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It will need > >>>> some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency fbdev. So > >>>> multi buffer for fbdev is needed. > >>> > >>> How exactly do we expect Android to move away from fbdev if we add > >>> features to the fbdev compat layer ? I'd much rather make it clear to > >>> them that fbdev is a thing from the past and that they'd better > >>> migrate now. > >> > >> If your point is that merging this patch will slow down the Android > >> move away from fbdev, I disagree with that (obviously). > >> > >> I don't care at all about Android on my platform of choice, but don't > >> see how that merging this patch will change anything. > >> > >> Let's be honest, Android trees typically have thousands of patches on > >> top of mainline. Do you think a simple, 15 LoC, patch will make any > >> difference to vendors? If they want to stay on fbdev and have that > >> feature, they'll just merge this patch, done. > > > > So, in that case, why not just let them do that? They'd already have > > to add patches to use this, surely; we don't have anything in mainline > > kernels which allows people to actually use this larger allocation. > > Apart from software mmap() and using panning to do flips, but I'm > > taking it as a given that people shipping Android on their devices > > aren't using software rendering. > > I think we need to make a distinction between fbdev the subsystem in the > kernel, and fbdev the uabi: > > - fbdev the subsystem is completely dead in upstream. I think we have full > agreement on that. > - fbdev the uabi isn't, and if we can get more users from fbdev based > drivers to kms/atomic drivers by adding fairly simple stuff like this, > I'm all for it. The real question, in my opinion, is how to get more users for the DRM/KMS userspace API, to help killing the fbdev API. What's the incentive for userspace to migrate if we tell them that we're going to support the fbdev API forever, and will even go through the trouble of extending the supported feature set ? I have a customer who wouldn't have migrated their userspace to DRM/KMS if these two patches had been merged a few years ago. I'd rather *reduce* the supported feature set over time until we can finally switch fbdev off. > Which means: Yes, I fully plan to merge this, it makes sense. It even > _helps_ by making fbdev-the-subsystem even deader. Making live hard for > out-of-tree folks or folks with shit userspace doesn't make sense, at > least if the only benefit for us is that we'll feel pure about our > intentions :-)
Hi Maxime, On Wednesday 15 Feb 2017 13:51:29 Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:25:08PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Tuesday 14 Feb 2017 21:09:51 Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:20:51AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > >>> On 13 February 2017 at 10:54, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 02:28:11PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>>> On Thursday 02 Feb 2017 11:31:56 Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>>>>> This patch add a config to support to create multi buffer for cma > >>>>>> fbdev. Such as double buffer and triple buffer. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cma fbdev is convient to add a legency fbdev. And still many > >>>>>> Android devices use fbdev now and at least double buffer is needed > >>>>>> for these Android devices, so that a buffer flip can be operated. It > >>>>>> will need some time for Android device vendors to abondon legency > >>>>>> fbdev. So multi buffer for fbdev is needed. > >>>>> > >>>>> How exactly do we expect Android to move away from fbdev if we add > >>>>> features to the fbdev compat layer ? I'd much rather make it clear > >>>>> to them that fbdev is a thing from the past and that they'd better > >>>>> migrate now. > >>>> > >>>> If your point is that merging this patch will slow down the Android > >>>> move away from fbdev, I disagree with that (obviously). > >>>> > >>>> I don't care at all about Android on my platform of choice, but don't > >>>> see how that merging this patch will change anything. > >>>> > >>>> Let's be honest, Android trees typically have thousands of patches on > >>>> top of mainline. Do you think a simple, 15 LoC, patch will make any > >>>> difference to vendors? If they want to stay on fbdev and have that > >>>> feature, they'll just merge this patch, done. > >>> > >>> So, in that case, why not just let them do that? They'd already have > >>> to add patches to use this, surely; we don't have anything in mainline > >>> kernels which allows people to actually use this larger allocation. > >>> Apart from software mmap() and using panning to do flips, but I'm > >>> taking it as a given that people shipping Android on their devices > >>> aren't using software rendering. > >> > >> I think we need to make a distinction between fbdev the subsystem in the > >> kernel, and fbdev the uabi: > >> > >> - fbdev the subsystem is completely dead in upstream. I think we have > >> full agreement on that. > >> > >> - fbdev the uabi isn't, and if we can get more users from fbdev based > >> drivers to kms/atomic drivers by adding fairly simple stuff like this, > >> I'm all for it. > > > > The real question, in my opinion, is how to get more users for the DRM/KMS > > userspace API, to help killing the fbdev API. What's the incentive for > > userspace to migrate if we tell them that we're going to support the fbdev > > API forever, and will even go through the trouble of extending the > > supported feature set ? I have a customer who wouldn't have migrated > > their userspace to DRM/KMS if these two patches had been merged a few > > years ago. > > If those patches are not in, then I can see three ways to support old > / deficient userspaces: > 1) Carry those patches out of tree > 2) Write an fbdev driver for the display engine > 3) Rewrite the userspace components > > While 3. would arguably be the best option, this isn't always one, > unfortunately. I agree that it's not a solution that can be deployed overnight, but it's clearly what we all (as in kernel community and system vendors) need to head towards. > And as a community, I think 1 and 2 are not very good for us. 1. will > drive away vendors from our community, undermining the effort we've > been doing for a few years. And 2 will result in a driver we really > don't want to merge (so useless), and even if it would out of tree, > that would make it one less system / board / SoC *with* DRM/KMS APIs, > reducing the interest of switching for application developpers. > > If we really want to make people switch to DRM / KMS, we have to make > it ubiquitous. And if we want to make it ubiquitous, we really want to > have a transition period where people will have both APIs, supported > in a decent enough way. Haven't we had such a grace period already, until the fbdev subsystem stopped accepting new drivers ? It has hardly been an overnight switch. > And then, that's a win for everyone, because in the process you get > fbdev (booo!) and KMS (yay!), allowing for people to switch over, and > eventually kill the emulation entirely. But it's far too early for > that. I mean, we don't even have an fbv replacement yet... We're talking about http://s-tech.elsat.net.pl/fbv/, whose latest release dates from 2011 ? :-) https://github.com/tomba/kmsxx/blob/master/utils/kmsview.cpp It won't be hard to add support for BMP, GIF, JPG or PNG.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig index ebfe8404c25f..2ca9bb26a4e4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@ config DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER help Choose this if you need the KMS CMA helper functions +config DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM + int "Cma Fbdev Buffer Number" + depends on DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER + default 1 + help + Defines the buffer number of cma fbdev. Default is one buffer. + For double buffer please set to 2 and 3 for triple buffer. + source "drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/Kconfig" source "drivers/gpu/drm/arm/Kconfig" diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c index 81b3558302b5..e3f8b9e720a0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_cma_helper.c @@ -411,6 +411,12 @@ static void drm_fbdev_cma_defio_fini(struct fb_info *fbi) kfree(fbi->fbops); } +static int fbdev_num_buffers = CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM; +module_param(fbdev_num_buffers, int, 0444); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(fbdev_num_buffers, + "Number of frame buffers to allocate [default=" + __MODULE_STRING(CONFIG_DRM_CMA_FBDEV_BUFFER_NUM) "]"); + /* * For use in a (struct drm_fb_helper_funcs *)->fb_probe callback function that * needs custom struct drm_framebuffer_funcs, like dirty() for deferred_io use. @@ -437,7 +443,7 @@ int drm_fbdev_cma_create_with_funcs(struct drm_fb_helper *helper, bytes_per_pixel = DIV_ROUND_UP(sizes->surface_bpp, 8); mode_cmd.width = sizes->surface_width; - mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height; + mode_cmd.height = sizes->surface_height * fbdev_num_buffers; mode_cmd.pitches[0] = sizes->surface_width * bytes_per_pixel; mode_cmd.pixel_format = drm_mode_legacy_fb_format(sizes->surface_bpp, sizes->surface_depth);