Am 12.05.21 um 14:06 schrieb Werner Sembach: > Hello, > > In addition to the existing "max bpc", and "Broadcast RGB/output_csc" drm > properties I propose 4 new properties: > "preferred pixel encoding", "active color depth", "active color range", and > "active pixel encoding"
As an alternative/additional to the feedback channels: Maybe the kernel should not only communicate resolutions and refresh rates of available modes, but also color capabilities. I tested with a monitor, for example, that had several 4k@60Hz modes/timings offered by the edid, but only some of them supported YCbCr 420. > > Motivation: > > Current monitors have a variety pixel encodings available: RGB, YCbCr 4:4:4, > YCbCr 4:2:2, YCbCr 4:2:0. > > In addition they might be full or limited RGB range and the monitors accept > different bit depths. > > Currently the kernel driver for AMD and Intel GPUs automatically configure > the color settings automatically with little > to no influence of the user. However there are several real world scenarios > where the user might disagree with the > default chosen by the drivers and wants to set his or her own preference. > > Some examples: > > 1. While RGB and YCbCr 4:4:4 in theory carry the same amount of color > information, some screens might look better on one > than the other because of bad internal conversion. The driver currently > however has a fixed default that is chosen if > available (RGB for Intel and YCbCr 4:4:4 for AMD). The only way to change > this currently is by editing and overloading > the edid reported by the monitor to the kernel. > > 2. RGB and YCbCr 4:4:4 need a higher port clock then YCbCr 4:2:0. Some > hardware might report that it supports the higher > port clock, but because of bad shielding on the PC, the cable, or the monitor > the screen cuts out every few seconds when > RGB or YCbCr 4:4:4 encoding is used, while YCbCr 4:2:0 might just work fine > without changing hardware. The drivers > currently however always default to the "best available" option even if it > might be broken. > > 3. Some screens natively only supporting 8-bit color, simulate 10-Bit color > by rapidly switching between 2 adjacent > colors. They advertise themselves to the kernel as 10-bit monitors but the > user might not like the "fake" 10-bit effect > and prefer running at the native 8-bit per color. > > 4. Some screens are falsely classified as full RGB range wile they actually > use limited RGB range. This results in > washed out colors in dark and bright scenes. A user override can be helpful > to manually fix this issue when it occurs. > > There already exist several requests, discussion, and patches regarding the > thematic: > > - https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/476 > > - https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1548 > > - https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/5/7/695 > > - https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/5/11/416 > > > Current State: > > I only know bits about the Intel i915 and AMD amdgpu driver. I don't know how > other driver handle color management > > - "max bpc", global setting applied by both i915 (only on dp i think?) and > amdgpu. Default value is "8". For every > resolution + frequency combination the highest possible even number between 6 > and max_bpc is chosen. If the range > doesn't contain a valid mode the resolution + frequency combination is > discarded (but I guess that would be a very > special edge case, if existent at all, when 6 doesn't work but 10 would > work). Intel HDMI code always checks 8, 12, and > 10 and does not check the max_bpc setting. > > - "Broadcast RGB" for i915 and "output_csc" for the old radeon driver (not > amdgpu), overwrites the kernel chosen color > range setting (full or limited). If I recall correctly Intel HDMI code > defaults to full unless this property is set, > Intel dp code tries to probe the monitor to find out what to use. amdgpu has > no corresponding setting (I don't know how > it's decided there). > > - RGB pixel encoding can be forced by overloading a Monitors edid with one > that tells the kernel that only RGB is > possible. That doesn't work for YCbCr 4:4:4 however because of the edid > specification. Forcing YCbCr 4:2:0 would > theoretically also be possible this way. amdgpu has a debugfs switch > "force_ycbcr_420" which makes the driver default to > YCbCr 4:2:0 on all monitors if possible. > > > Proposed Solution: > > 1. Add a new uAPI property "preferred pixel encoding", as a per port setting. > > - An amdgpu specific implementation was already shared here: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/476 > > - It also writes back the actually used encoding if the one requested was > not possible, overwriting the requested > value in the process. I think it would be better to have this feedback > channel as a different, read-only property. > > - Make this solution vendor agnostic by putting it in the > drm_connector_state struct next do max_bpc > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc1/source/include/drm/drm_connector.h#L654 > and add patches to amdgpu and i915 to > respect this setting > > 2. Convert "Broadcast RGB" to a vendor agnostic setting/replace with a vendor > agnostic setting. > > - Imho the name is not very fitting, but it pops up in many tutorials > throughout the web (some other opinions? how > could a rename be handled?". > > - Also move it from Intel specific structs to the drm_connector_state > struct (please let me know if there is a > better place) > > 3. Strive for full implementation of "max bpc" > > - I need to double check the Intel HDMI code. > > 4. Add 3 feedback channels "active color depth", "active color range", and > "active pixel encoding" as vendor agnostic > settings in the drm_connector_state struct > > - Possible values are: > > - unknown, undefined, 6-bit, 8-bit, 9-bit, 10-bit, 11-bit, 12-bit, > 14-bit, 16-bit (alternatively: an integer > from -1 (unknown), 0 (undefined) to 16, let me know what would be more > suitable) > > - unknown, undefined, full, limited > > - unknown, undefined, rgb, ycbcr444, ycbcr422, ycbcr420 > > - it's the responsibility of the driver to update the values once the > port configuration changes > > - if the driver does not support the feedback channels they are set to > unknown > > - if the driver uses a non listed setting it should set the property to > undefined > > - A more detailed description why I think these feedback channel are > important and should be their own read-only > property can be found here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/5/11/339 > > > Adoption: > > A KDE dev wants to implement the settings in the KDE settings GUI: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/476#note_912370 > > Tuxedo Computers (my employer) wants to implement the settings desktop > environment agnostic in Tuxedo Control Center. I > will start work on this in parallel to implementing the new kernel code. > > > Questions: > > I'm very curious about feedback from the dri-devel community. Would the > concept outlaid above be accepted as new uAPI > once it's fully implemented? > > Where would be the best way to store the new vendor agnostic settings? > Following the implementation of max_bpc i would > put it in the drm_connector_state struct. > > My way forward would be to implement the feedback channels first, because > they can be very useful for debugging the > setting properties afterwards. I will split each of it up it in 3 or 5 patch > sets: 1 for the vendor agnostic part, 1 for > Intel (or 2 split up between HDMI and DP), and 1 for AMD (or 2 split up > between HDMI and DP) > > Kind regards, > > Werner Sembach > > > _______________________________________________ > amd-gfx mailing list > amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
