| 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: <CAGb2v66widuPE1im1kykAsh3y8Pj-dpSBF9xyvDtytFFh8XDNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:14:44 +0800
From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
thomas@...sch.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/19] drm/sun4i: backend: Check for the number of
alpha planes
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> Due to the way the composition is done in hardware, we can only have a
> single alpha-enabled plane active at a time, placed in the second (highest
> priority) pipe.
>
> Make sure of that in our atomic_check to not end up in an impossible
> scenario.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.h | 2 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_layer.c | 23 +-------------
> 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c
> index c4986054909b..eb1749d2c0d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c
> @@ -329,6 +329,8 @@ static int sun4i_backend_atomic_check(struct sunxi_engine *engine,
> struct drm_atomic_state *state = crtc_state->state;
> struct drm_device *drm = state->dev;
> struct drm_plane *plane;
> + unsigned int num_planes = 0;
> + unsigned int num_alpha_planes = 0;
> unsigned int num_frontend_planes = 0;
>
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Starting checking our planes\n");
> @@ -341,6 +343,7 @@ static int sun4i_backend_atomic_check(struct sunxi_engine *engine,
> drm_atomic_get_plane_state(state, plane);
> struct sun4i_layer_state *layer_state =
> state_to_sun4i_layer_state(plane_state);
> + struct drm_framebuffer *fb = plane_state->fb;
>
> if (sun4i_backend_plane_uses_frontend(plane_state)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Using the frontend for plane %d\n",
> @@ -351,6 +354,50 @@ static int sun4i_backend_atomic_check(struct sunxi_engine *engine,
> } else {
> layer_state->uses_frontend = false;
> }
> +
> + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Plane FB format is %s\n",
> + drm_get_format_name(fb->format->format,
> + &format_name));
> + if (fb->format->has_alpha)
> + num_alpha_planes++;
> +
> + num_planes++;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * The hardware is a bit unusual here.
> + *
> + * Even though it supports 4 layers, it does the composition
> + * in two separate steps.
> + *
> + * The first one is assigning a layer to one of its two
> + * pipes. If more that 1 layer is assigned to the same pipe,
> + * and if pixels overlaps, the pipe will take the pixel from
> + * the layer with the highest priority.
> + *
> + * The second step is the actual alpha blending, that takes
> + * the two pipes as input, and uses the eventual alpha
> + * component to do the transparency between the two.
> + *
> + * This two steps scenario makes us unable to guarantee a
> + * robust alpha blending between the 4 layers in all
> + * situations, since this means that we need to have one layer
> + * with alpha at the lowest position of our two pipes.
> + *
> + * However, we cannot even do that, since the hardware has a
> + * bug where the lowest plane of the lowest pipe (pipe 0,
> + * priority 0), if it has any alpha, will discard the pixel
> + * entirely and just display the pixels in the background
> + * color (black by default).
> + *
> + * Since means that we effectively have only three valid
^^^^^ This
> + * configurations with alpha, all of them with the alpha being
> + * on pipe1 with the lowest position, which can be 1, 2 or 3
> + * depending on the number of planes and their zpos.
> + */
> + if (num_alpha_planes > SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_ALPHA_LAYERS) {
> + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Too many planes with alpha, rejecting...\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> if (num_frontend_planes > SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_FRONTEND_LAYERS) {
> @@ -358,6 +405,9 @@ static int sun4i_backend_atomic_check(struct sunxi_engine *engine,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("State valid with %u planes, %u alpha, %u video\n",
> + num_planes, num_alpha_planes, num_frontend_planes);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.h
> index 04a4f11b87a8..52e77591186a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.h
> @@ -146,6 +146,8 @@
> #define SUN4I_BACKEND_HWCCOLORTAB_OFF 0x4c00
> #define SUN4I_BACKEND_PIPE_OFF(p) (0x5000 + (0x400 * (p)))
>
> +#define SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_LAYERS 4
> +#define SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_ALPHA_LAYERS 1
> #define SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_FRONTEND_LAYERS 1
>
> struct sun4i_backend {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_layer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_layer.c
> index fbf25d59cf88..900e716443b8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_layer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_layer.c
> @@ -201,32 +201,11 @@ struct drm_plane **sun4i_layers_init(struct drm_device *drm,
> struct sun4i_backend *backend = engine_to_sun4i_backend(engine);
> int i;
>
> - planes = devm_kcalloc(drm->dev, ARRAY_SIZE(sun4i_backend_planes) + 1,
> + planes = devm_kcalloc(drm->dev, SUN4I_BACKEND_NUM_LAYERS,
> sizeof(*planes), GFP_KERNEL);
The returned "planes" array has to have a sentinel at the end, as we
never return the actual number of layers created. That is what the +1
was for in the original code.
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
> if (!planes)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> - /*
> - * The hardware is a bit unusual here.
> - *
> - * Even though it supports 4 layers, it does the composition
> - * in two separate steps.
> - *
> - * The first one is assigning a layer to one of its two
> - * pipes. If more that 1 layer is assigned to the same pipe,
> - * and if pixels overlaps, the pipe will take the pixel from
> - * the layer with the highest priority.
> - *
> - * The second step is the actual alpha blending, that takes
> - * the two pipes as input, and uses the eventual alpha
> - * component to do the transparency between the two.
> - *
> - * This two steps scenario makes us unable to guarantee a
> - * robust alpha blending between the 4 layers in all
> - * situations. So we just expose two layers, one per pipe. On
> - * SoCs that support it, sprites could fill the need for more
> - * layers.
> - */
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sun4i_backend_planes); i++) {
> const struct sun4i_plane_desc *plane = &sun4i_backend_planes[i];
> struct sun4i_layer *layer;
> --
> git-series 0.9.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists