On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:57:23 +0100 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Pekka, > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 9:46 AM Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:51:31 +0100 > > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 8:33 AM Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > > > On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 09:15:08 +1100 (AEDT) > > > > Finn Thain wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2022, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 4:05 PM Pekka Paalanen wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 14:30:18 +0100 > > > > > > > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 9:53 PM Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > > > > Introduce fourcc codes for color-indexed frame buffer formats with > > > > > > > > > two, four, and sixteen colors, and provide a mapping from bit per > > > > > > > > > pixel and depth to fourcc codes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the number of bits per pixel is less than eight, these rely on > > > > > > > > > proper block handling for the calculation of bits per pixel and > > > > > > > > > pitch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h > > > > > > > > > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/drm_fourcc.h > > > > > > > > > @@ -99,7 +99,10 @@ extern "C" { > > > > > > > > > #define DRM_FORMAT_INVALID 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* color index */ > > > > > > > > > -#define DRM_FORMAT_C8 fourcc_code('C', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C */ > > > > > > > > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C1 fourcc_code('C', '1', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1:C2:C3:C4:C5:C6:C7 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 eight pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C2 fourcc_code('C', '2', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1:C2:C3 2:2:2:2 four pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C4 fourcc_code('C', '4', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C0:C1 4:4 two pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > > +#define DRM_FORMAT_C8 fourcc_code('C', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] C 8 one pixel/byte */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* 8 bpp Red */ > > > > > > > > > #define DRM_FORMAT_R8 fourcc_code('R', '8', ' ', ' ') /* [7:0] R */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After replying to Ilia's comment[1], I realized the CFB drawing > > > > > > > > operations use native byte and bit ordering, unless > > > > > > > > FBINFO_FOREIGN_ENDIAN is set. > > > > > > > > While Amiga, Atari, and Sun-3 use big-endian bit ordering, > > > > > > > > e.g. Acorn VIDC[2] uses little endian, and SH7760[3] is configurable > > > > > > > > (sh7760fb configures ordering to match host order). > > > > > > > > BTW, ssd130{7fb,x}_update_rect() both assume little-endian, so I > > > > > > > > guess they are broken on big-endian. > > > > > > > > Fbtest uses big-endian bit ordering, so < 8 bpp is probably broken > > > > > > > > on little-endian. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hence the above should become: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #define DRM_FORMAT_C1 fourcc_code('C', '1', ' ', ' ') /* > > > > > > > > [7:0] C7:C6:C5:C4:C3:C2:C1:C0 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 eight pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > #define DRM_FORMAT_C2 fourcc_code('C', '2', ' ', ' ') /* > > > > > > > > [7:0] C3:C2:C1:C0 2:2:2:2 four pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > #define DRM_FORMAT_C4 fourcc_code('C', '4', ' ', ' ') /* > > > > > > > > [7:0] C1:C0 4:4 two pixels/byte */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same changes should be made for DRM_FORMAT_[RD][124]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fbdev emulation code should gain support for these with and without > > > > > > > > DRM_FORMAT_BIG_ENDIAN, the latter perhaps only on big-endian platforms? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAKb7UvgEdm9U=+RyRwL0TGRfA_Qc7NbhCWoZOft2DKdXggtKYw@mail.gmail.com/ > > > > > > > > [2] See p.30 of the VIDC datasheet > > > > > > > > http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/docs/Acorn/Misc/Acorn_VIDC_Datasheet.pdf > > > > > > > > [3] See p.1178 of the SH7660 datasheet > > > > > > > > https://datasheet.octopart.com/HD6417760BL200AV-Renesas-datasheet-14105759.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why would CPU endianess affect the order of bits in a byte? > > > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't, but see below. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that bit 0 one machine is (1 << 0), and on another machine > > > > > > > bit 0 is (1 << 7)? > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I mean that in case of multiple pixels per byte, the display > > > > > > hardware pumps out pixels to the CRTC starting from either the MSB > > > > > > or the LSB of the first display byte. Which order depends on the > > > > > > display hardware, not on the CPU. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In C, we have only one way to address bits of a byte and that is with > > > > > > > arithmetic. You cannot take the address of a bit any other way, can you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we standardise on "bit n of a byte is addressed as (1 << n)"? > > > > > > > > > > > > BIT(n) in Linux works the same for little- and big-endian CPUs. > > > > > > But display hardware may use a different bit order. > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps some of this confusion could be avoided if you describe the > > > > > problem in terms of the sequence of scan-out of pixels, rather than in > > > > > terms of the serialization of bits. The significance of bits within each > > > > > pixel and the ordering of pixels within each memory word are independent, > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > Yes, that might help. > > > > > > Display: > > > > > > P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 > > > > > > P15 P14 P13 P12 P11 P10 P9 P8 P7 P6 P5 P4 P3 P2 P1 P0 > > > > Hi Geert, > > > > does this mean the display hardware emits even rows from left to right > > and odd rows from right to left? > > No, it means I should have my morning coffee first, and remove all > temporary cruft before pressing send :-( > > The above paragraph should have read: > > Display (16 pixels): > > P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 > > > I'm guessing P stands for "pixel". > > Exactly. > > > > Memory: > > > > > > 1 bpp (MSB first): > > > > > > bit7 bit6 bit5 bit4 bit3 bit2 bit1 bit0 > > > ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- > > > byte 0: P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 > > > byte 1: P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 > > > > > > 1 bpp (LSB first): > > > > > > bit7 bit6 bit5 bit4 bit3 bit2 bit1 bit0 > > > ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- > > > byte 0: P7 P6 P5 P4 P3 P2 P1 P0 > > > byte 1: P15 P14 P13 P12 P11 P10 P9 P8 > > > > > > 2 bpp (MSB first): > > > > > > bits7-6 bits5-4 bits3-2 bits1-0 > > > ------- ------- ------- ------- > > > byte 0: P0 P1 P2 P3 > > > byte 1: P4 P5 P6 P7 > > > byte 2: P8 P9 P10 P11 > > > byte 3: P12 P13 P14 P15 > > > > > > 2 bpp (LSB first): > > > > > > bits7-6 bits5-4 bits3-2 bits1-0 > > > ------- ------- ------- ------- > > > byte 0: P3 P2 P1 P0 > > > byte 1: P7 P6 P5 P4 > > > byte 2: P11 P10 P9 P8 > > > byte 3: P15 P14 P13 P12 > > > > > > 4 bpp (MSB first): > > > > > > bits7-4 bits3-0 > > > ------- ------- > > > byte 0: P0 P1 > > > byte 1: P2 P3 > > > byte 2: P4 P5 > > > byte 3: P6 P7 > > > byte 4: P8 P9 > > > byte 5: P10 P11 > > > byte 6: P12 P13 > > > byte 7: P14 P15 > > > > > > 4 bpp (LSB first): > > > > > > bits7-4 bits3-0 > > > ------- ------- > > > byte 0: P1 P0 > > > byte 1: P3 P2 > > > byte 2: P5 P4 > > > byte 3: P7 P6 > > > byte 4: P9 P8 > > > byte 5: P11 P10 > > > byte 6: P13 P12 > > > byte 7: P15 P14 > > > > I think I can guess what you meant there, and it looks understandable > > to me. These tables are actually very clear, and leave only one thing > > undefined: when multiple bits form a pixel, in which order do the bits > > form the value. I recall you said fbdev allows for both orderings but > > only one order is ever used if I understood right. > > Indeed. The third ordering is the ordering of the bits in a pixel. > As fb_bitfield.msb_right is always false, no hardware ever supported by > fbdev used the other ordering, so we only have to care about: > > 1 bpp: P = [ bitN ] > 2 bpp: P = [ bitN bitN-1 ] > 4 bpp: P = [ bitN bitN-1 bitN-2 bitN-3 ] Excellent! > > > > Also, when drm_fourcc.h is describing pixel formats, it needs to > > > > consider only how a little-endian CPU accesses them. That's how pixel > > > > data in memory is described. Display hardware plays no part in that. > > > > It is the driver's job to expose the pixel formats that match display > > > > hardware behaviour. > > > > > > But if the "CPU format" does not match the "display support", > > > all pixel data must be converted? > > > > Of course. If the driver author does not want to convert pixel data in > > flight, then the author should not let the driver expose a format that > > needs conversion. > > ... in which case we need a DRM fourcc code for the format? Yes. You can define any new formats you need as long as the format definition does not depend on (is not affected/modified by) CPU endianess or any other CPU or display hardware property. I believe this is the convention used with drm_fourcc. If the format wanted by display hardware depends on something, then you need all relevant pixel formats defined and choose at build or driver initialisation time which ones to expose. > BTW, Atari and Amiga use bitplanes for bpp <= 8, so they need > conversion anyway. Right, that's probably the most reasonable approach. If you really wanted to expose bitplanes, I could imagine that some new format modifiers could achieve that. Thanks, pq