| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201305241300.25461.jbe@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 13:00:25 +0200
From: Juergen Beisert <jbe@...gutronix.de>
To: Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@...i.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com" <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
"fabio.estevam@...escale.com" <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
"brian@...stalfontz.com" <brian@...stalfontz.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: mxsfb: DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT flag outputs invalid colours
Hector Palacios wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> On 05/24/2013 12:28 PM, Juergen Beisert wrote:
> > Hector Palacios wrote:
> >> Hi Juergen,
> >>
> >> On 05/23/2013 03:31 PM, Juergen Beisert wrote:
> >>> Hi Maxime,
> >>>
> >>> maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 01:55:28PM +0200, Hector Palacios wrote:
> >>>>> I'm using an i.MX28 based board with lcd connected with 18bits data
> >>>>> bus. My platform uses 32 bits per pixel:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> mxsfb_pdata.default_bpp = 32;
> >>>>> mxsfb_pdata.ld_intf_width = STMLCDIF_18BIT;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> With these settings the mxsfb.c driver sets flag DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT
> >>>>> at HW_LCDIF_CTRL register in function mxsfb_set_par():
> >>>>>
> >>>>> case 32:
> >>>>> dev_dbg(&host->pdev->dev, "Setting up RGB888/666 mode\n");
> >>>>> ctrl |= CTRL_SET_WORD_LENGTH(3);
> >>>>> switch (host->ld_intf_width) {
> >>>>> case STMLCDIF_8BIT:
> >>>>> dev_dbg(&host->pdev->dev,
> >>>>> "Unsupported LCD bus width mapping\n");
> >>>>> return -EINVAL;
> >>>>> case STMLCDIF_16BIT:
> >>>>> case STMLCDIF_18BIT:
> >>>>> /* 24 bit to 18 bit mapping */
> >>>>> ctrl |= CTRL_DF24; /* ignore the upper 2 bits in
> >>>>> * each colour component
> >>>>> */
> >>>>> break;
> >>>>> case STMLCDIF_24BIT:
> >>>>> /* real 24 bit */
> >>>>> break;
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>> According to the manual, this flag does:
> >>>>> 0x0: ALL_24_BITS_VALID: Data input to the block is in 24 bpp
> >>>>> format, such that all RGB 888 data is contained in 24 bits.
> >>>>> 0x1: DROP_UPPER_2_BITS_PER_BYTE — Data input to the block is
> >>>>> actually RGB 18 bpp, but there is 1 colour per byte, hence the upper
> >>>>> 2 bits in each byte do not contain any useful data, and should be
> >>>>> dropped.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The setting of this flag is producing bad colours with true colour
> >>>>> images (i.e. the Linux penguin is displayed ok, but QT applications
> >>>>> or images displayed with fbv are not).
> >>>>> I believe the setting of this flag is not correct (after all, if my
> >>>>> bpp is 32, then all 24bit colours are useful and dropping the upper
> >>>>> 2 bits is a bad idea).
> >>>>> If I don't set it, then true colour images are displayed correctly.
> >>>>> The only problem is that the Linux penguin is displayed much darker
> >>>>> than usual (correct colours, but darker). Perhaps the 224 colour
> >>>>> format of this image justifies it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I noticed the cfa10049 platform also uses the same configuration (18
> >>>>> bits data bus and 32bpp) and was wondering if true colour images are
> >>>>> correctly displayed in this platform with this flag set (for example
> >>>>> with fbv application [1]).
> >>>>
> >>>> I had the exact same problem, and suggested the exact same solution a
> >>>> few weeks back.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2470441/
> >>>>
> >>>> The conclusion of that discussion what that the userspace applications
> >>>> were not honouring the bitfield correctly set by the mxsfb driver, and
> >>>> as such, it was not a bug in the driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> While this is correct, I wonder, now that since we had that same
> >>>> problem in a very short amount of time, if we couldn't set this
> >>>> behaviour dependant of some (dt? kernel argument?) property so that
> >>>> one could customise it anyway he want.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maxime
> >>>
> >>> i.MX2[3|8] LCD1 LCD2 LCD3
> >>> 24bit 18bit 18bit
> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >>> LCD_D0 B0 B0 --
> >>> LCD_D1 B1 B1 --
> >>> LCD_D2 B2 B2 B0
> >>> LCD_D3 B3 B3 B1
> >>> LCD_D4 B4 B4 B2
> >>> LCD_D5 B5 B5 B3
> >>> LCD_D6 B6 G0 B4
> >>> LCD_D7 B7 G1 B5
> >>>
> >>> LCD_D8 G0 G2 --
> >>> LCD_D9 G1 G3 --
> >>> LCD_D10 G2 G4 G0
> >>> LCD_D11 G3 G5 G1
> >>> LCD_D12 G4 R0 G2
> >>> LCD_D13 G5 R1 G3
> >>> LCD_D14 G6 R2 G4
> >>> LCD_D15 G7 R3 G5
> >>>
> >>> LCD_D16 R0 R4 --
> >>> LCD_D17 R1 R5 --
> >>> LCD_D18 R2 R0
> >>> LCD_D19 R3 R1
> >>> LCD_D20 R4 R2
> >>> LCD_D21 R5 R3
> >>> LCD_D22 R6 R4
> >>> LCD_D23 R7 R5
> >>>
> >>> Is your display connected like LCD2 or LCD3? LCD3 must still handled
> >>> like a 24 bit display shown in LCD1, while only the LCD2-case is the
> >>> "24 bit to 18 bit mapping" case.
> >>>
> >>> At least my current tests with an i.MX23 and a connection like LCD2 are
> >>> working here with a Qt application. Qt honours the pixel bitfield
> >>> description. And I'm using the "bits-per-pixel = <32>" and "bus-width =
> >>> <18>" entries in the device tree.
> >>
> >> I have a 24bit LCD display but my connection to it is done at 18bits
> >> data width. Represented below as LCD4.
> >> NOTE: In my LCD4 column, notation Rx/Gx/Bx represent the color bit in
> >> memory as well as the display data line.
> >> Since we use 32bpp each channel has 8 bits (R7..R0, etc.).
> >> I understand that you have an 18bit display and that your notation in
> >> LCD2 column represents the display data lines, not the color bit indexes
> >> in memory.
> >>
> >> i.MX2[3|8] LCD1 LCD2 LCD3 LCD4
> >> 24bit 18bit 18bit 24bit connected at 18bit
> >> -------------------------------------------------------
> >> LCD_D0 B0 B0 -- B2
> >> LCD_D1 B1 B1 -- B3
> >> LCD_D2 B2 B2 B0 B4
> >> LCD_D3 B3 B3 B1 B5
> >> LCD_D4 B4 B4 B2 B6
> >> LCD_D5 B5 B5 B3 B7
> >> LCD_D6 B6 G0 B4 G2
> >> LCD_D7 B7 G1 B5 G3
> >>
> >> LCD_D8 G0 G2 -- G4
> >> LCD_D9 G1 G3 -- G5
> >> LCD_D10 G2 G4 G0 G6
> >> LCD_D11 G3 G5 G1 G7
> >> LCD_D12 G4 R0 G2 R2
> >> LCD_D13 G5 R1 G3 R3
> >> LCD_D14 G6 R2 G4 R4
> >> LCD_D15 G7 R3 G5 R5
> >>
> >> LCD_D16 R0 R4 -- R6
> >> LCD_D17 R1 R5 -- R7
> >> LCD_D18 R2 R0
> >> LCD_D19 R3 R1
> >> LCD_D20 R4 R2
> >> LCD_D21 R5 R3
> >> LCD_D22 R6 R4
> >> LCD_D23 R7 R5
> >>
> >> For 32bpp (RGB888) and 18bit data bus I would expect the LCD controller
> >> to take the six *most significant* bits [7..2] from each color byte out
> >> to the LCD data bus (LCD_D17..D0) in the order depicted in my LCD4
> >> column.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure what the DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT flag is doing, but dropping the
> >> two most significant bits of color in memory doesn't seem to be a good
> >> idea unless (maybe) color is in 18bpp. Previous kernels did not even
> >> touch this flag.
> >>
> >> Does the following patch make sense?
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/mxsfb.c b/drivers/video/mxsfb.c
> >> index b1c1a80..bb0a4e1 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/video/mxsfb.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/video/mxsfb.c
> >> @@ -298,9 +298,6 @@ static int mxsfb_check_var(struct fb_var_screeninfo
> >> *var, break;
> >> case STMLCDIF_16BIT:
> >> case STMLCDIF_18BIT:
> >> - /* 24 bit to 18 bit mapping */
> >> - rgb = def_rgb666;
> >> - break;
> >> case STMLCDIF_24BIT:
> >> /* real 24 bit */
> >> rgb = def_rgb888;
> >> @@ -424,11 +421,6 @@ static int mxsfb_set_par(struct fb_info *fb_info)
> >> return -EINVAL;
> >> case STMLCDIF_16BIT:
> >> case STMLCDIF_18BIT:
> >> - /* 24 bit to 18 bit mapping */
> >> - ctrl |= CTRL_DF24; /* ignore the upper 2 bits in
> >> - * each colour component
> >> - */
> >> - break;
> >> case STMLCDIF_24BIT:
> >> /* real 24 bit */
> >> break;
> >>
> >> The setting of def_rgb666 for a 32bpp color depth does not make sense to
> >> me because the color in memory is really rgb888.
> >>
> >> With this patch, my true color images are displayed ok and so does the
> >> penguin logo. I don't know however how other displays connections at
> >> 18bit will do.
> >
> > Your 24 bit display is connected like a regular 18 bit display. So they
> > should work in the same way with the same settings. You *must* always
> > skip two data bits from the memory RGB888 to form a RGB666 value.
> >
> > I just did some measurement here with my i.MX23 based hardware.
> >
> > I'm using 32 bits per pixel and the 18 bit display interface
> > (LCD_D[0..17]).
> >
> > And surprise, surprise: the i.MX23 *always* maps the 24 bit input data to
> > the 18 bit interface. And what does the DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT aka. CTRL_DF24
> > do??? Just simple: it seems its meaning changes with the interface width.
> > The documentation says:
> >
> > 0 = all 24 bits are valid
> > 1 = drop upper 2 bits per byte
> >
> > This text seems valid for a real 24 bit display (but I cannot test it).
> > From my measurement its meaning changes when used with an 18 bit display
> > to:
> >
> > 0 = drop lower 2 bits per byte
> > 1 = drop upper 2 bits per byte
> >
> > When this bit is 0:
> >
> > red green blue
> > 10000001|00001111|10001111 (memory layout)
> >
> > 100000..|000011..|100011.. (at the display)
> >
> > When this bit is 1:
> >
> > red green blue
> > 10000001|00001111|10001111 (memory layout)
> >
> > ..000001|..001111|..001111 (at the display)
>
> And how can the setting of this flag be useful?
Maybe with this measurement knowledge is isn't useful any more. When I wrote
this code I just used the datasheet.
> In the example above, you had a red component of 0x81 (half way through the
> scale), which is converted to a 0x01 (almost black) at the display. Isn't
> this wrong?
>
> This only looks right to me if you set a 18bpp but even in that case
> masking the upper bits isn't really needed at all.
These bits should only show what is happen to the data. In both cases you must
define a corresponding fb_bitfield description. Which means the currently
existing def_rgb666 description is valid only when the DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT
aka. CTRL_DF24 register bit is set.
And for the DATA_FORMAT_24_BIT aka. CTRL_DF24 register be cleared you *can*
use the def_rgb888 or define a different def_rgb666_shift like this one:
static const struct fb_bitfield def_rgb666_shift[] = {
[RED] = {
.offset = 18,
.length = 6,
},
[GREEN] = {
.offset = 10,
.length = 6,
},
[BLUE] = {
.offset = 2,
.length = 6,
},
[TRANSP] = { /* no support for transparency */
.length = 0,
}
};
I'm not sure if it is of interest for a userland application to know if a
display can handle 256 k or 16 M colours physically.
With the def_rgb888 in use *all* displays look like 16 M colour LCDs. With the
def_rgb666 in use an 18 bit display really looks like an 18 bit display.
Regards,
Juergen
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Juergen Beisert |
Linux Solutions for Science and Industry | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists