On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:45 PM, FlyCry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your helpful replies.
> Acctually, my lcdc support 24-bits packed framebuffer to 18-bits
> output to suit the 18bpp lcd. The framebuffer format is
> rrrrrr00gggggg00bbbbbb00, packed.
> I configed pixelflinger as RGB888. That could compatible to the 24-
> bits packed framebuffer. But I found the red and the green exchanged
> their place. Is android's default color space BGR but not RGB? The
> hardware can't swap red and green. Is there anything I can do to make
> android swap red and green.

you mean red and blue, right?

SurfaceFlinger should be using RGB (a byte of red followed by a byte
of green, followed by a byte of blue). Unless there is a bug in
pixelflinger, that's what it should do. I will check tomorrow if this
is working properly (I don't think 24-bits mode have ever been used
before).


Mathias


> Thanks a lot.
>
>
>
> On 12月2日, 下午6时39分, Phil HUXLEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps I wasn't being clear enough. Some LCD panels do have 18 bits per
>> pixel, but use some (2 or 3) of those bits for other things (can't remember
>> what), so the actual colour resolution is 16 bits or less.
>>
>> All I was suggesting was stay in a traditional 565 domain until the final
>> buffer swap to the screen (i.e. don't change any of the rendering side -
>> not even the configs), but do as efficient a conversion as possible on the
>> final swap - potentially easy to do if that final swap can be singled out.
>>
>>              Mathias Agopian
>>              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>              gle.com>                                                   To
>>              Sent by:                  [email protected]
>>              [EMAIL PROTECTED]                                          cc
>>              ooglegroups.com
>>                                                                    Subject
>>                                        [android-porting] Re: Android
>>              02/12/2008 10:09          porting problem - LCD BPP
>>
>>              Please respond to
>>              [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>               ooglegroups.com
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:52 AM, Phil HUXLEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I was thinking that the system would work in 16 bit more - 565 and just
>> > convert to 18 bit. i.e. the composition happens at 16 bit, not 32.  It's
>>
>> What's the point of using a 18-bits framebuffer if most graphics are
>> done in 16-bits? I assumed, the goal would be to take advantage of the
>> extra 2 bits
>>
>> > definitely an overhead though. Is the screen update done via an
>> > eglSwapBuffers call on a single composited surface representing the
>>
>> screen?
>>
>> yes
>>
>> > It might not take very long to try it? and could be faster than the
>> > overheads bought about by dealing in 18 bit or 32 bit land when rendering
>> > (more bandwidth needed - particularly if pixels are touched multiple
>> > times). No obvious winner - it just might be quick to try.
>>
>> > Presumably the rendering routines in the software GL library would also
>> > have to be modified (unless the platform is using hardware).
>>
>> No, in this scenario, they would be rendering into a 565 buffer as
>> usual, which would be composited in 565, and eventually converted to
>> 666 during eglSwapBuffers(). GL doesn't need to be changed, just the
>> implementation of the EGLNativeWindowType.
>>
>> Unless the panel cannot be configured to 565 (that would be crazy), I
>> wouldn't go down that road, if it's not going to improve visual
>> quality.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >             Mathias Agopian
>> >             <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >             gle.com>                                                   To
>> >             Sent by:                  [email protected]
>> >             [EMAIL PROTECTED]                                          cc
>> >             ooglegroups.com
>> >                                                                   Subject
>> >                                       [android-porting] Re: Android
>> >             02/12/2008 09:43          porting problem - LCD BPP
>>
>> >             Please respond to
>> >             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >              ooglegroups.com
>>
>> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Phil HUXLEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >> Alternatively, couldn't a blit be inserted somewhere such that a
>> > conversion
>> >> is done at the point of updating the display (and would this include a
>> >> regionlist of areas that have changed to optimise it?). Is there such an
>> >> 'update point'?
>>
>> > I think this would be slower generally. You'd end up doing all the
>> > composition in 32-bits, and then doing another copy/conversion by
>> > hand. I don't think it buys you anything. Also this would not match
>> > the EGL model very well, which SurfaceFlinger (very purposedly) relies
>> > on.
>>
>> > In my experience update regions don't buy you much because the case
>> > you care about is when you're "flinging" a list and that tends to
>> > update the whole screen; surfaceflinger uses them though.
>>
>> > I should have mentioned in the email before that pixelflinger has some
>> > logic to be able to replace the generated code by hand-written
>> > routines (see scanline.cpp). You'd want to do this for a few common
>> > operations like: RGBA32 -> RGB18 with and without blending. I think
>> > the code it'll generate won't be bad at all, but you'll be able to use
>> > pld() and/or process several pixels at a time.
>>
>> > One of the annoying part will be to chose a new constant for the new
>> > format. The namespace for those is limited and global to the platform
>> > (there are no way -yet- to create pixel formats dynamically at runtime
>> > -- which the codegen should be able to handle). We just need to be
>> > absolutely sure that whichever value we pick won't conflict with
>> > future version of the platform (I already added a few formats post
>> > 1.0).
>>
>> > Mathias
>>
>> >>             Mathias Agopian
>> >>             <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>             gle.com>
>> To
>> >>             Sent by:                  [email protected]
>> >>             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> cc
>> >>             ooglegroups.com
>>
>> Subject
>> >>                                       [android-porting] Re: Android
>> >>             02/12/2008 09:14          porting problem - LCD BPP
>>
>> >>             Please respond to
>> >>             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>              ooglegroups.com
>>
>> >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:03 PM, FlyCry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>> My lcdc support 2 format of 18bpp framebuffer. One is 18bpp packed.
>> >>> Another is a format of 3 byte:
>> >>> Red[5:0] 0 0 Green[5:0] 0 0 Blue[5:0] 0 0
>> >>> could the second format be configed in android display?
>>
>> >> So there are no mode where it has the color components in the higher 6
>> >> bits?!
>>
>> >> There is a way to configure pixelflinger to be able to render into
>> >> arbitrary bit-patterns, however, the format you're describing has
>> >> never been tested (obviously). It would also be a huge performance hit
>> >> because:
>> >> 1) we would have to make sure all windows are created in 32-bits (only
>> >> mode > 16 bits supported by the software render), which also implies
>> >> much higher memory usage and bus pressure
>> >> 2) the 32-bits surface will have to be converted at runtime and in
>> >> software to 18 bits.
>>
>> >> To make it work you'd have to add a new pixelformat describing your
>> >> framebuffer to pixelflinger, then you would have to make sure the code
>> >> that handles the framebuffer (EGLNativeDisplay.cpp) returns that.
>> >> You'd have to modify surfaceflinger to always create 32-bits surfaces.
>> >> Currently there is no abstraction for all these aspects, so it'll have
>> >> to be hacked in.
>>
>> >> On top of that, you'll have to replace all the 16-bits assets (because
>> >> you wouldnt' get any benefit otherwise).
>>
>> >> Performance will likely be bad do to the increased bus pressure,
>> >> memory usage and CPU pressure needed for conversion.
>>
>> >> I can't believe the framebuffer cannot be configured to 32-bits like
>> > this:
>> >>  xxxxxxxxbbbbbb00gggggg00rrrrrr00
>> >> this wouldn't cost anything more in h/w (just more address space, but
>> >> who cares?), and it would be a lot more efficient from a software
>> >> point of view.
>>
>> >> mathias
>>
>> >>> Thanks.
>>
>> >>> On 12月2日, 下午12时42分, Mathias Agopian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>> Hi,
>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:22 PM, FlyCry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> > My board has an lcd of 18 bpp, but android UI is 16 bpp. So the
>> >>>> > display is abnormal when andriod runs. Could android be configed to
>> > 18
>> >>>> > bpp? And how to do it?
>> >>>> > Thanks for anyone attention to this topic.
>>
>> >>>> What's the format of your 18bpp framebuffer? (hopefully it's not 18bpp
>> >> packed!).
>>
>> >>>> Mathias
>>
>> >> ForwardSourceID:NT000040E6
>>
>> > ForwardSourceID:NT000040F6
>>
>> ForwardSourceID:NT0000410E- 隐藏被引用文字 -
>>
>> - 显示引用的文字 -
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: http://groups.google.com/group/android-porting
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to