On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:25:41 +0200
Pekka Paalanen [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:37:16 +0100
Daniel Vetter [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:53 AM Brian Starkey [off-list ref] wrote:  

quoted

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 12:10:29PM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote:    

quoted

On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:08:42 +0100
Neil Armstrong [off-list ref] wrote:
   

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+/*
+ * Amlogic Video Framebuffer Compression modifiers
+ *
+ * Amlogic uses a proprietary lossless image compression protocol and format
+ * for their hardware video codec accelerators, either video decoders or
+ * video input encoders.
+ *
+ * It considerably reduces memory bandwidth while writing and reading
+ * frames in memory.
+ * Implementation details may be platform and SoC specific, and shared
+ * between the producer and the decoder on the same platform.    

Hi,

after a lengthy IRC discussion on #dri-devel, this "may be platform and
SoC specific" is a problem.

It can be an issue in two ways:

- If something in the data acts like a sub-modifier, then advertising
  support for one modifier does not really tell if the data layout is
  supported or not.

- If you need to know the platform and/or SoC to be able to interpret
  the data, it means the modifier is ill-defined and cannot be used in
  inter-machine communication (e.g. Pipewire).
   

Playing devil's advocate, the comment sounds similar to
I915_FORMAT_MOD_{X,Y}_TILED:

 * This format is highly platforms specific and not useful for cross-driver
 * sharing. It exists since on a given platform it does uniquely identify the
 * layout in a simple way for i915-specific userspace.    

Yeah which we regret now. We need to now roll out a new set of
modifiers for at least some of the differences in these on the
modern-ish chips (the old crap is pretty much lost cause anyway).

This was kinda a nasty hack to smooth things over since we have epic
amounts of userspace, but it's really not a great idea (and no one
else really has epic amounts of existing userspace that uses tiling
flags everywhere, this is all new code).
-Daniel
  

quoted

Isn't the statement that this for sharing between producer and decoder
_on the same platform_ a similar clause with the same effect?

What advantage is there to exposing the gory details? For Arm AFBC
it's necessary because IP on the SoC can be (likely to be) from
different vendors with different capabilities.

If this is only for talking between Amlogic IP on the same SoC, and
those devices support all the same "flavours", I don't see what is
gained by making userspace care about internals.    

The trouble is if you mix&match IP cores, and one of them supports
flavours A, B, C and the other C, D, E. But all you have is a single
magic modifier for "whatever the flavour is that soc prefers". So
someone gets to stuff this in DT.

Also eventually, maybe, perhaps ARM does grow up into the
client/server space with add-on pcie graphics, and at least for client
you very often end up with integrated + add-in pcie gpu. At that point
you really can't have magic per-soc modifiers anymore.  

Hi,

I also heard that Pipewire will copy buffers and modifiers verbatim
from one machine to another when streaming across network, assuming
that the same modifier means the same thing on all machines.[Citation needed]

If that is something that must not be done with DRM modifiers, then
please contact them and document that.

Sorry, it's waypipe, not pipewire:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe/


Thanks,
pq