On 2018-04-10 05:35 PM, Cyr, Aric wrote:
>> On 2018-04-10 03:37 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>> On 2018-04-10 08:45 AM, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 09.04.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Manasi Navare:
>>>>> Thanks for initiating the discussion. Find my comments
>>>>> below: On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:00:21PM -0400, Harry
>>>>> Wentland wrote:
>>>>>> On 2018-04-09 03:56 PM, Harry Wentland wrote:
>>>>>>> === A DRM render API to support variable refresh rates
>>>>>>> ===
>>>>>>> In order to benefit from adaptive sync and VRR userland
>>>>>>> needs a way to let us know whether to vary frame timings
>>>>>>> or to target a different frame time. These can be
>>>>>>> provided as atomic properties on a CRTC: * bool
>>>>>>> variable_refresh_compatible * int
>>>>>>> target_frame_duration_ns (nanosecond frame duration)
>>>>>>> This gives us the following cases:
>>>>>>> variable_refresh_compatible = 0, target_frame_duration_ns
>>>>>>> = 0 * drive monitor at timing's normal refresh rate
>>>>>>> variable_refresh_compatible = 1, target_frame_duration_ns
>>>>>>> = 0 * send new frame to monitor as soon as it's
>>>>>>> available, if within min/max of monitor's reported
>>>>>>> capabilities
>>>>>>> variable_refresh_compatible = 0/1,
>>>>>>> target_frame_duration_ns = > 0 * send new frame to
>>>>>>> monitor with the specified target_frame_duration_ns
>>>>>>> When a target_frame_duration_ns or
>>>>>>> variable_refresh_compatible cannot be supported the
>>>>>>> atomic check will reject the commit.
>>>>> What I would like is two sets of properties on a CRTC or
>>>>> preferably on a connector:
>>>>> KMD properties that UMD can query: * vrr_capable -  This will
>>>>> be an immutable property for exposing hardware's capability
>>>>> of supporting VRR. This will be set by the kernel after 
>>>>> reading the EDID mode information and monitor range
>>>>> capabilities. * vrr_vrefresh_max, vrr_vrefresh_min - To
>>>>> expose the min and max refresh rates supported. These
>>>>> properties are optional and will be created and attached to
>>>>> the DP/eDP connector when the connector is getting
>>>>> intialized.
>>>> Mhm, aren't those properties actually per mode and not per
>>>> CRTC/connector?
>>>>> Properties that you mentioned above that the UMD can set
>>>>> before kernel can enable VRR functionality *bool vrr_enable
>>>>> or vrr_compatible target_frame_duration_ns
>>>> Yeah, that certainly makes sense. But target_frame_duration_ns
>>>> is a bad name/semantics.
>>>> We should use an absolute timestamp where the frame should be
>>>> presented, otherwise you could run into a bunch of trouble with
>>>> IOCTL restarts or missed blanks.
>>> Also, a fixed target frame duration isn't suitable even for
>>> video playback, due to drift between the video and audio clocks.
> Why?  Even if they drift, you know you want to show your 24Hz video
> frame for 41.6666ms and adaptive sync can ensure that with reasonable
> accuracy.

Due to the drift, the video player has to occasionally either skip a
frame or present it twice to prevent audio and video going out of sync,
resulting in visual artifacts.

With time-based presentation and variable refresh rate, audio and video
can stay in sync without occasional visual artifacts.

It would be a pity to create a "variable refresh rate API" which doesn't
allow harnessing this strength of variable refresh rate.

Earthling Michel Dänzer               |               http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast             |             Mesa and X developer
dri-devel mailing list

Reply via email to