Message-ID: <0a2f32dde1005f642b438e82326e8cc9@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Thu, 02 Jul 2020 12:03:21 +0530
From:   dikshita@...eaurora.org
To:     Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@...fresne.ca>,
        Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Cc:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, vgarodia@...eaurora.org,
        majja@...eaurora.org, jdas@...eaurora.org,
        Yunfei Dong <yunfei.dong@...iatek.com>,
        Dylan Yip <dylany@...inx.com>,
        linux-media-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] METADATA design using V4l2 Request API

Hi,

A gentle reminder for review.

Thanks,
Dikshita

On 2020-06-23 18:17, dikshita@...eaurora.org wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> On 2020-06-16 18:30, dikshita@...eaurora.org wrote:
>> Hi Nicolas, Hans,
>> 
>> Thanks for your comments and sorry for the delayed response.
>> 
>> On 2020-06-12 22:07, Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
>>> Le vendredi 12 juin 2020 à 12:05 +0200, Hans Verkuil a écrit :
>>>> On 11/06/2020 17:06, Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
>>>> > Le jeudi 28 mai 2020 à 22:08 -0400, Nicolas Dufresne a écrit :
>>>> > > Le jeudi 28 mai 2020 à 13:24 +0200, Hans Verkuil a écrit :
>>>> > > > On 28/05/2020 12:48, dikshita@...eaurora.org wrote:
>>>> > > > > Hi Hans,
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Thanks for the review.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > On 2020-05-26 16:27, Hans Verkuil wrote:
>>>> > > > > > Hi Dikshita,
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > My apologies for the delay, this was (mostly) due to various vacation
>>>> > > > > > days.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > On 08/05/2020 08:21, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > There are many commercialized video use cases which needs metadata
>>>> > > > > > > info
>>>> > > > > > > to be circulated between v4l2 client and v4l2 driver.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > METADATA has following requirements associated:
>>>> > > > > > > •Metadata is an optional info available for a buffer. It is not
>>>> > > > > > > mandatorily for every buffer.
>>>> > > > > > >  For ex. consider metadata ROI (Region Of Interest). ROI is specified
>>>> > > > > > > by clients to indicate
>>>> > > > > > >  the region where enhanced quality is desired. This metadata is given
>>>> > > > > > > as an input information
>>>> > > > > > >  to encoder output plane. Client may or may not specify the ROI for a
>>>> > > > > > > frame during encode as
>>>> > > > > > >  an input metadata. Also if the client has not provided ROI metadata
>>>> > > > > > > for a given frame,
>>>> > > > > > >  it would be incorrect to take the metadata from previous frame. If
>>>> > > > > > > the data and
>>>> > > > > > >  metadata is asynchronous, it would be difficult for hardware to
>>>> > > > > > > decide if it
>>>> > > > > > >  needs to wait for metadata buffer or not before processing the input
>>>> > > > > > > frame for encoding.
>>>> > > > > > > •Synchronize the buffer requirement across both the video node/session
>>>> > > > > > >  (incase metadata is being processed as a separate v4l2 video
>>>> > > > > > > node/session).
>>>> > > > > > >  This is to avoid buffer starvation.
>>>> > > > > > > •Associate the metadata buffer with the data buffer without adding any
>>>> > > > > > > pipeline delay
>>>> > > > > > >  in waiting for each other. This is applicable both at the hardware
>>>> > > > > > > side (the processing end)
>>>> > > > > > >  and client side (the receiving end).
>>>> > > > > > > •Low latency usecases like WFD/split rendering/game streaming/IMS have
>>>> > > > > > > sub-50ms e2e latency
>>>> > > > > > >  requirements, and it is not practical to stall the pipeline due to
>>>> > > > > > > inherent framework latencies.
>>>> > > > > > >  High performance usecase like high-frame rate playback/record can
>>>> > > > > > > lead to frame loss during any pipeline latency.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > To address all above requirements, we used v4l2 Request API as
>>>> > > > > > > interlace.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > As an experiment, We have introduced new control
>>>> > > > > > > V4L2_CID_MPEG_VIDEO_VENUS_METADATA
>>>> > > > > > > to contain the METADATA info. Exact controls can be finalized once the
>>>> > > > > > > interface is discussed.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > For setting metadata from userspace to kernel, let say on encode
>>>> > > > > > > output plane,
>>>> > > > > > > following code sequence was followed
>>>> > > > > > > 1. Video driver is registering for media device and creating a media
>>>> > > > > > > node in /dev
>>>> > > > > > > 2. Request fd is allocated by calling MEDIA_IOC_REQUEST_ALLOC IOCTL on
>>>> > > > > > > media fd.
>>>> > > > > > > 3. METADATA configuration is being applied on request fd using
>>>> > > > > > > VIDIOC_S_EXT_CTRLS IOCTL
>>>> > > > > > >    and the same request fd is added to buf structure structure before
>>>> > > > > > > calling VIDIOC_QBUF on video fd.
>>>> > > > > > > 4. The same request is queued through MEDIA_REQUEST_IOC_QUEUE IOCTL to
>>>> > > > > > > driver then, as a result
>>>> > > > > > >    to which METADATA control will be applied to buffer through S_CTRL.
>>>> > > > > > > 5. Once control is applied and request is completed,
>>>> > > > > > > MEDIA_REQUEST_IOC_REINIT IOCTL is called
>>>> > > > > > >    to re-initialize the request.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > This is fine and should work well. It's what the Request API is for,
>>>> > > > > > so no problems here.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > We could achieve the same on capture plane as well by removing few
>>>> > > > > > > checks present currently
>>>> > > > > > > in v4l2 core which restrict the implementation to only output plane.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > Why do you need the Request API for the capture side in a
>>>> > > > > > memory-to-memory driver? It is not
>>>> > > > > > clear from this patch series what the use-case is. There are reasons
>>>> > > > > > why this is currently
>>>> > > > > > not allowed. So I need to know more about this.
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > Regards,
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > 	Hans
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > we need this for use cases like HDR10+ where metadata info is part of
>>>> > > > > the bitstream.
>>>> > > > > To handle such frame specific data, support for request api on capture
>>>> > > > > plane would be needed.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > That's for the decoder, right? So the decoder extracts the HDR10+ metadata
>>>> > > > and fills in a control with the metadata?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > If that's the case, then it matches a similar request I got from mediatek.
>>>> > > > What is needed is support for 'read-only' requests: i.e. the driver can
>>>> > > > associate controls with a capture buffer and return that to userspace. But
>>>> > > > it is not possible to *set* controls in userspace when queuing the request.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > If you think about it you'll see that setting controls in userspace for
>>>> > > > a capture queue request makes no sense, but having the driver add set
>>>> > > > read-only controls when the request is finished is fine and makes sense.
>> 
>> I tried an experiment where I removed set control from the client for 
>> metadata,
>> queued buffer and request to driver and when capture buffer was ready,
>> I dequeued the buffer,
>> extracted the request fd and called get_ext_control IOCTL on driver.
>> this resulted in error from
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c#L3678
>> based on what I understood, since there was no set control for the 
>> request,
>> there was no v4l2 ctrl handler object associated with it so no obj was 
>> found and
>> hence the error(please correct if my understanding is wrong).
>> 
>> So if client is not supposed to call set control on capture plane then
>> 1. how to avoid the above error?
>> 2. should driver call v4l2_s_ext_ctrls() with the request once buffer
>> and request are
>>    queued to driver? Driver should be able to extract the request fd
>> from request to
>>    achieve the same right? is that possible?
>> 
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Hi Hans,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm not sure I follow you on what will this look like in userspace. Can you post
>>>> > > an RFC of your idea, describing the userspace flow ? Particularly, I'm not sure
>>>> > > how the request helps in synchronizing the read of the metadata controls (over
>>>> > > simply reading the control after a DQBUF, which we can match to a specific input
>>>> > > using the provided timestamp). I also fail to understand how this aligns with
>>>> > > Stanimir concern with the performance of the get control interface.
>>>> 
>>>> Hmm, I think I missed this email.
>>>> 
>>>> Note that there is no guarantee that reading a control after a DQBUF 
>>>> will give
>>>> you the value for that dequeued frame. The driver may already have 
>>>> generated
>>>> multiple capture frames by the time userspace dequeues the oldest 
>>>> buffer.
>>>> 
>>>> > As there was no answer, I'll try and ask a more precise question. While
>>>> > I still believe it's better done in userspace for M2M decoder, there is
>>>> > a need for HDMI receivers (hence adding direct CC to Dylan Yip from
>>>> > Xilinx).
>>>> >
>>>> > Would this match your expected userspace workflow ?
>>>> >
>>>> > 1. Allocate capture buffers
>>>> > 2. Allocate the same number of request fd (ro request)
>>>> > 3. For each capture buffer
>>>> >   3.1 Queue the capture buffer (passing the request)
>>>> >   3.2 Queue the request
>>>> > 4. Wait for capture buffer to be ready
>>>> > 5. Dequeue a capture buffer, and lookup it's request FD
>>>> > 6. Wait for the request to complete (needed ?)
>>>> > 7. Read the meta control passing the request
>>>> 
>>>> Right.
>>>> 
>>>> > I'm not sure if 6. is required, driver could just to things in the
>>>> > right order (store the meta in the request before marking the buffer
>>>> > done).
>>>> 
>>>> For HDR information you don't need 6. For histogram/statistics such
>>>> information might become available after the capture buffer was 
>>>> ready.
>>>> 
>>>> I would just implement this as follows:
>>>> 
>>>> 4. Wait for the request to complete
>>> 
>>> I should have clarified my thought, I first wrote it like this, but
>>> then realized that it forces the driver into picking up capture 
>>> buffer
>>> in the same order they were queued. For an encoder, it might be a
>>> problem as in practice it does not encode in the same order it will
>>> produce (I think this depends on internal encoder implementation
>>> details though).
>>> 
>>> So in fact, I was waiting on the queue, to pop a Capture buffer to
>>> figure-out which request was being involved. And then I'd get the
>>> control value for that request (which may need waiting further on the
>>> request, the "heavy" reference is there).
>>> 
>>> But I think we can assume this is all in order for HDMI/SDI/CSI 
>>> capture
>>> (well raw/bayer capture mostly) and keep it a bit more lightweight
>>> there.
>>> 
>>>> 5. Dequeue a capture buffer, and lookup it's request FD
>>>> 6. Read the meta control passing the request
>>>> 
>>>> No need to wait for both the request and the capture buffer.
>>> 
>>> Ack.
>> 
>> The sequence which I followed for implementing this is.
>>  1. Allocate capture buffers
>>  2. Allocate the same number of request fd
>>  3. For each capture buffer
>>     3.1 call VIDIOC_S_EXT_CTRLS IOCTL to the driver with metadata info
>> and request fd
>>     3.2 Queue the capture buffer (passing the request)
>>     3.3 Queue the request
>> 4. Wait for capture buffer to be ready
>> 5. Dequeue a capture buffer, and lookup it's request FD
>> 6. Call VIDIOC_G_EXT_CTRLS passing the request for the dequeued 
>> buffer.
>> 
>> Qualcomm H/W generates both data buffer and metadata buffer at the 
>> same time and
>> provides this info to the driver in a single response, there won't be
>> separate responses for
>> data buffer and metadata buffer.
>> so there is no need to wait for request completion.
>> The driver will write meta info in the control before sending buffer
>> done to the client.
>> so when the buffer is available for deque, meta info will also be 
>> available.
>> 
>> but I agree that the wait for the request might be required for HW
>> that generates
>> data buffer and metadata buffer separately.
>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  Now this is pretty heavy, but does not seems broken. The
>>>> > question is how to you avoid reading the control if it haven't changed
>>>> > ? Can driver guaranty to send the control change event before marking a
>>>> > buffer done ? (this is for static HDR meta, which will change when
>>>> > stream is change, e.g. starting/ending of adds on TV).
>>>> 
>>>> There are two possible mechanisms today:
>>>> 
>>>> 1) use requests for the capture queue, and then you need to query 
>>>> the
>>>> request for the static HDR control. The advantage is that this is a
>>>> 1-to-1 mapping of the control value with the buffer. The 
>>>> disadvantage is that
>>>> it adds overhead.
>> 
>> Since we need 1-to-1 mapping of buffer and metadata info using this 
>> approach for
>> capture queue as well should be fine, right? or there are any 
>> concerns?
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 2) don't use requests, instead just subscribe to the control event.
>>>> Whenever the static HDR meta data changes, you'll get an event. But
>>>> then it isn't linked to a specific frame.
>>>> 
>>>> A third option would be to extend struct v4l2_event_ctrl with a 
>>>> __u32
>>>> buffer_index field to associate a capture buffer with this change. 
>>>> You'd
>>>> need an addition control flag as well to indicate that this control 
>>>> is
>>>> associated with a specific buffer.
>>>> 
>>>> (Just a brainstorm, this no doubt would need some refinement)
>>> 
>>> Or extend with a target sequence number, as we already have this 
>>> unique
>>> number handy.
>>> 
>>> In fact I was already thinking about extending the event with a 
>>> target
>>> v4l2_buffer sequence. But then I realized that if you have two
>>> consecutive changes, there is still no way to ensure you can read the
>>> control value matching the event you are processing.
>>> 
>>> So this idea would conceptually mean that instead of using the
>>> "request" as a control storage, we'd be using per "buffer" control
>>> storage. I wonder how realistic this is in the existing framework. 
>>> But
>>> could be a thread to explore.
>>> 
>>> To add to the brainstorm, we could introduce a meta type for 
>>> controls.
>>> Can't think of a name now, but basically we would "pop" a control
>>> value. That control would contain the information needed to identify
>>> the buffer it applied to (like a sequence number). Fifo would be 
>>> leaky
>>> at the tail, and sized around the size of the queue. This way,
>>> userspace can ignore it without causing any leaks, which also allow 
>>> for
>>> backward compatibility.
>>> 
>>> The "pop" ioctl could be extended with the target sequence number, so
>>> that you get exactly the control you are looking for (ignoring the
>>> older one, and preventing the newer one from being extracted). Of
>>> course, the event is needed to tel when something get queued for 
>>> static
>>> meta.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  While for HDR10+
>>>> > and similar dynamic meta, we expect a new value for every run, HDR10+
>>>> > data is much much bigger. Do we really want that to be model around a
>>>> > control ?
>>>> 
>>>> No, we don't. For that you would want a metadata video device.
>>>> 
>>>> Dynamic metadata is a separate problem. I would also really like to 
>>>> know
>>>> a bit more about the various HW implementations for this before 
>>>> deciding
>>>> on a specific API. E.g., can all HW pass this data to a separate DMA 
>>>> engine?
>>>> Would it only split off dynamic metadata or just all InfoFrames?
>> 
>> Qualcomm HW has a single DMA engine that stores both data and metadata
>> buffer and
>> the driver is notified by HW in a single response with both data
>> buffer and metadata buffer.
>> So using a request based approach for HDR10+ metadata or any dynamic
>> data as well should be fine?
>> 
>> If not, what could be the other way to achieve this?
>> 
>>> 
>>> That seems like a HW question, I'll pass. Though, in my mind, the
>>> separated metadata video device are only usable if there is a 1:1
>>> relationship between buffers and metadata. For other use cases, it's
>>> missing a notification mechanism (like described above) to avoid 
>>> having
>>> to introduce arbitrary (and likely bogus) latency that ensure we 
>>> didn't
>>> proceed without the associate metadata. To I think it's not a very
>>> powerful way to pass around metadata, unless it's 1:1 with the 
>>> buffers,
>>> which for HDR10+ fits.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> 	Hans
>>>> 
>>>> > > > Implementing this shouldn't be a big job: you'd need a new
>>>> > > > V4L2_BUF_CAP_SUPPORTS_RO_REQUESTS
>>>> > > > capability, a corresponding new flag in struct vb2_queue, a new ro_requests
>>>> > > > flag in
>>>> > > > struct v4l2_ctrl_handler, and try_set_ext_ctrls() should check that flag and
>>>> > > > refuse to
>>>> > > > try/set any controls if it is true.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Finally, the v4l2_m2m_qbuf() function should be updated to just refuse the
>>>> > > > case where both
>>>> > > > capture and output queue set V4L2_BUF_CAP_SUPPORTS_REQUESTS.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > And the documentation needs to be updated.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > I've added Yunfei Dong to the CC list, perhaps mediatek did some work on
>>>> > > > this already.
> 
> I implemented 'read-only' request based on your recommendations.
> I had to relax a few checks to make it work and also used
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/21/359 as reference
> for the implementation.
> In addition to that, I made changes in vb2_core_queue_init() as well
> to allow ro request.
> 
> In driver, I am initializing a new ro_ctrl_handler with read only
> controls I want to support
> and setting ro_request to true for this ctrl handler. I am also
> setting supports_ro_requests to true
> in driver while calling vb2_queue_init() for capture buffer.
> In userspace,
>    1. Waiting for capture buffer to be ready
>    2. Dequeueing capture buffer, and extracting its request FD
>    3. Calling VIDIOC_G_EXT_CTRLS passing the request for the dequeued 
> buffer.
> This will internally call g_volatile_ctrl to the driver and driver
> will fill the ctrl data/payload.
> 
> I have one query here when g_volatile_ctrl is called on driver,
> how we will make sure that the data which driver is filling in the
> ctrl is actually for the buffer which was dequeued.
> for eg: driver might have called buffer done for lets say two buffers
> and have metadata associated with
> those two buffers with it. Now when get_ctrl is called for one of
> those buffers, how will the driver know
> which metadata to fill in ctrl data.
> Please let me know if I am missing something here.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dikshita
> 
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Regards,
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > 	Hans
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > Thanks,
>>>> > > > > Dikshita
>>>> > > > > > > We profiled below data with this implementation :
>>>> > > > > > > 1. Total time taken ( round trip ) for setting up control data on
>>>> > > > > > > video driver
>>>> > > > > > >    with VIDIOC_S_EXT_CTRLS, QBUF and Queue Request: 737us
>>>> > > > > > > 2. Time taken for first QBUF on Output plane to reach driver with
>>>> > > > > > > REQUEST API enabled (One way): 723us
>>>> > > > > > > 3. Time taken for first QBUF on Output plane to reach driver without
>>>> > > > > > > REQUEST API (One way) : 250us
>>>> > > > > > > 4. Time taken by each IOCTL to complete ( round trip ) with REQUEST
>>>> > > > > > > API enabled :
>>>> > > > > > >     a. VIDIOC_S_EXT_CTRLS : 201us
>>>> > > > > > >     b. VIDIOC_QBUF : 92us
>>>> > > > > > >     c. MEDIA_REQUEST_IOC_QUEUE: 386us
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Kindly share your feedback/comments on the design/call sequence.
>>>> > > > > > > Also as we experimented and enabled the metadata on capture plane as
>>>> > > > > > > well, please comment if any issue in
>>>> > > > > > > allowing the metadata exchange on capture plane as well.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Reference for client side implementation can be found at [1].
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>>>> > > > > > > Dikshita
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > [1]
>>>> > > > > > > https://git.linaro.org/people/stanimir.varbanov/v4l2-encode.git/log/?h=dikshita/request-api
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Dikshita Agarwal (3):
>>>> > > > > > >   Register for media device
>>>> > > > > > >     - Initialize and register for media device
>>>> > > > > > >     - define venus_m2m_media_ops
>>>> > > > > > >     - Implement APIs to register/unregister media controller.
>>>> > > > > > >   Enable Request API for output buffers
>>>> > > > > > >     - Add dependency on MEDIA_CONTROLLER_REQUEST_API in Kconfig.
>>>> > > > > > >     - Initialize vb2 ops buf_out_validate and buf_request_complete.
>>>> > > > > > >     - Add support for custom Metadata control
>>>> > > > > > > V4L2_CID_MPEG_VIDEO_VENUS_METADATA
>>>> > > > > > >     - Implemeted/Integrated APIs for Request setup/complete.
>>>> > > > > > >   Enable Request API for Capture Buffers
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/common/videobuf2/videobuf2-v4l2.c |   4 +-
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/Kconfig                  |   2 +-
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h        |  36 ++++
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.c     | 247
>>>> > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/helpers.h     |  15 ++
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/venc.c        |  63 +++++-
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/venc_ctrls.c  |  61 +++++-
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ctrls.c            |  10 +
>>>> > > > > > >  drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-mem2mem.c          |  17 +-
>>>> > > > > > >  include/media/v4l2-ctrls.h                      |   1 +
>>>> > > > > > >  include/media/venus-ctrls.h                     |  22 +++
>>>> > > > > > >  11 files changed, 465 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>> > > > > > >  create mode 100644 include/media/venus-ctrls.h
>>>> > > > > > >

Powered by blists - more mailing lists