Message-ID: <CADnq5_P1d6qMAUwY7W+SKXQVik99yvaQp6tJ-i+4ki8ZP5f5TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:12:35 -0400
From:   Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
To:     Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Cyr, Aric" <Aric.Cyr@....com>,
        "Wentland, Harry" <Harry.Wentland@....com>
Cc:     Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com>,
        linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Maling list - DRI developers 
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, mihail.atanassov@....com
Subject: Re: DRM Atomic property for color-space conversion

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Ville Syrjälä
<ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 03:55:41PM +0000, Brian Starkey wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 05:15:46PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>> >On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:33:29PM +0000, Brian Starkey wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 03:35:13PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>> >> >On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 05:23:24PM +0000, Brian Starkey wrote:
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We're looking to enable the per-plane color management hardware in
>> >> >> Mali-DP with atomic properties, which has sparked some conversation
>> >> >> around how to handle YCbCr formats.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As it stands today, it's assumed that a driver will implicitly "do the
>> >> >> right thing" to display a YCbCr buffer.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> YCbCr data often uses different gamma curves and signal ranges (e.g.
>> >> >> BT.609, BT.701, BT.2020, studio range, full-range), so its desirable
>> >> >> to be able to explicitly control the YCbCr to RGB conversion process
>> >> >> from userspace.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We're proposing adding a "CSC" (color-space conversion) property to
>> >> >> control this - primarily per-plane for framebuffer->pipeline CSC, but
>> >> >> perhaps one per CRTC too for devices which have an RGB pipeline and
>> >> >> want to output in YUV to the display:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Name: "CSC"
>> >> >> Type: ENUM | ATOMIC;
>> >> >> Enum values (representative):
>> >> >> "default":
>> >> >>         Same behaviour as now. "Some kind" of YCbCr->RGB conversion
>> >> >>         for YCbCr buffers, bypass for RGB buffers
>> >> >> "disable":
>> >> >>         Explicitly disable all colorspace conversion (i.e. use an
>> >> >>         identity matrix).
>> >> >> "YCbCr to RGB: BT.709":
>> >> >>         Only valid for YCbCr formats. CSC in accordance with BT.709
>> >> >>         using [16..235] for (8-bit) luma values, and [16..240] for
>> >> >>         8-bit chroma values. For 10-bit formats, the range limits are
>> >> >>         multiplied by 4.
>> >> >> "YCbCr to RGB: BT.709 full-swing":
>> >> >>         Only valid for YCbCr formats. CSC in accordance with BT.709,
>> >> >>         but using the full range of each channel.
>> >> >> "YCbCr to RGB: Use CTM":*
>> >> >>         Only valid for YCbCr formats. Use the matrix applied via the
>> >> >>         plane's CTM property
>> >> >> "RGB to RGB: Use CTM":*
>> >> >>         Only valid for RGB formats. Use the matrix applied via the
>> >> >>         plane's CTM property
>> >> >> "Use CTM":*
>> >> >>         Valid for any format. Use the matrix applied via the plane's
>> >> >>         CTM property
>> >> >> ... any other values for BT.601, BT.2020, RGB to YCbCr etc. etc. as
>> >> >> they are required.
>> >> >
>> >> >Having some RGB2RGB and YCBCR2RGB things in the same property seems
>> >> >weird. I would just go with something very simple like:
>> >> >
>> >> >YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC:
>> >> >* BT.601
>> >> >* BT.709
>> >> >* custom matrix
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I think we've agreed in #dri-devel that this CSC property
>> >> can't/shouldn't be mapped on-to the existing (hardware implementing
>> >> the) CTM property - even in the case of per-plane color management -
>> >> because CSC needs to be done before DEGAMMA.
>> >>
>> >> So, I'm in favour of going with what you suggested in the first place:
>> >>
>> >> A new YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC property, enum type, with a list of fixed
>> >> conversions. I'd drop the custom matrix for now, as we'd need to add
>> >> another property to attach the custom matrix blob too.
>> >>
>> >> I still think we need a way to specify whether the source data range
>> >> is broadcast/full-range, so perhaps the enum list should be expanded
>> >> to all combinations of BT.601/BT.709 + broadcast/full-range.
>> >
>> >Sounds reasonable. Not that much full range YCbCr stuff out there
>> >perhaps. Well, apart from jpegs I suppose. But no harm in being able
>> >to deal with it.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> (I'm not sure what the canonical naming for broadcast/full-range is,
>> >> we call them narrow and wide)
>> >
>> >We tend to call them full vs. limited range. That's how our
>> >"Broadcast RGB" property is defined as well.
>> >
>>
>> OK, using the same ones sounds sensible.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >And trying to use the same thing for the crtc stuff is probably not
>> >> >going to end well. Like Daniel said we already have the
>> >> >'Broadcast RGB' property muddying the waters there, and that stuff
>> >> >also ties in with what colorspace we signal to the sink via
>> >> >infoframes/whatever the DP thing was called. So my gut feeling is
>> >> >that trying to use the same property everywhere will just end up
>> >> >messy.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, agreed. If/when someone wants to add CSC on the output of a CRTC
>> >> (after GAMMA), we can add a new property.
>> >>
>> >> That makes me wonder about calling this one SOURCE_YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC to
>> >> be explicit that it describes the source data. Then we can later add
>> >> SINK_RGB_TO_YCBCR_CSC, and it will be reasonably obvious that its
>> >> value describes the output data rather than the input data.
>> >
>> >Source and sink have a slight connotation in my mind wrt. the box that
>> >produces the display signal and the box that eats the signal. So trying
>> >to use the same terms to describe the internals of the pipeline inside
>> >the "source box" migth lead to some confusion. But we do probably need
>> >some decent names for these to make the layout of the pipeline clear.
>> >Input/output are the other names that popped to my mind but those aren't
>> >necessarily any better. But in the end I think I could live with whatever
>> >names we happen to pick, as long as we document the pipeline clearly.
>> >
>> >Long ago I did wonder if we should just start indexing these things
>> >somehow, and then just looking at the index should tell you the order
>> >of the operations. But we already have the ctm/gamma w/o any indexes so
>> >that idea probably isn't so great anymore.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I want to avoid confusion caused by ending up with two
>> >> {CS}_TO_{CS}_CSC properties, where one is describing the data to the
>> >> left of it, and the other describing the data to the right of it, with
>> >> no real way of telling which way around it is.
>> >
>> >Not really sure what you mean. It should always be
>> ><left>_to_<right>_csc.
>>
>> Agreed, left-to-right. But for instance on a CSC property representing
>> a CRTC output CSC (just before hitting the connector), which happens
>> to be converting RGB to YCbCr:
>>
>> CRTC -> GAMMA -> RGB_TO_YCBCR_CSC
>>
>> ...the enum value "BT.601 Limited" means that the data on the *right*
>> of RGB_TO_YCBCR_CSC is "BT.601 Limited"
>>
>> On the other hand for a CSC on the input of a plane, which happens to
>> be converting YCbCr to RGB:
>>
>> RAM -> YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC -> DEGAMMA
>>
>> ...the enum value "BT.601 Limited" means that the data on the *left*
>> of YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC is "BT.601 Limited".
>>
>> Indicating in the property name whether its value is describing the
>> data on the left or the right is needed (and I don't think inferring
>> that "it's always the YCBCR one" is the correct approach).
>>
>> In my example above, "SOURCE_xxx" would mean the enum value is
>> describing the "source" data (i.e. the data on the left) and
>> "SINK_xxx" would mean the enum value is describing the "sink" data
>> (i.e. the data on the right). This doesn't necessarily need to infer a
>> particular point in the pipeline.
>
> Right, so I guess you want the values to be named "<a> to <b>" as well?
> Yes, I think we'll be wanting that as well.
>
> So what we might need is something like:
> enum YCBCR_TO_RGB_CSC
>  * YCbCr BT.601 limited to RGB BT.709 full
>  * YCbCr BT.709 limited to RGB BT.709 full <this would be the likely default value IMO>
>  * YCbCr BT.601 limited to RGB BT.2020 full
>  * YCbCr BT.709 limited to RGB BT.2020 full
>  * YCbCr BT.2020 limited to RGB BT.2020 full
>
> And thanks to BT.2020 we'll need a RGB->RGB CSC property as well. Eg:
> enum RGB_TO_RGB_CSC
>  * bypass (or separate 709->709, 2020->2020?) <this would be the default>
>  * RGB BT.709 full to RGB BT.2020 full
>
> Alternatives would involve two properties to define the input and output
> from the CSC separately, but then you lose the capability to see which
> combinations are actually supoorted.
>
> We may want to add the "curstom matrix" enum value + the blob property
> for the actual matrix for hw capable of doing that.
>
> Adding Shashank to cc since he's the one who has been
> looking at this colorspacey stuff on our side.

Adding Aric and Harry for awareness.

Alex

>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists