Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:08:30 -0300
From:   Helen Koike <helen.koike@...labora.com>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, mchehab@...nel.org,
        hans.verkuil@...co.com, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
        sakari.ailus@....fi, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
        tfiga@...omium.org, hiroh@...omium.org, nicolas@...fresne.ca,
        Brian.Starkey@....com, kernel@...labora.com,
        narmstrong@...libre.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        frkoenig@...omium.org, mjourdan@...libre.com,
        stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] media: v4l2: Add extended buffer operations

Hi Hans,

Thank you for your review.

On 9/9/20 9:27 AM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> Hi Helen,
> 
> Again I'm just reviewing the uAPI.
> 
> On 04/08/2020 21:29, Helen Koike wrote:
>> From: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>
>>
>> Those extended buffer ops have several purpose:
>> 1/ Fix y2038 issues by converting the timestamp into an u64 counting
>>    the number of ns elapsed since 1970
>> 2/ Unify single/multiplanar handling
>> 3/ Add a new start offset field to each v4l2 plane buffer info struct
>>    to support the case where a single buffer object is storing all
>>    planes data, each one being placed at a different offset
>>
>> New hooks are created in v4l2_ioctl_ops so that drivers can start using
>> these new objects.
>>
>> The core takes care of converting new ioctls requests to old ones
>> if the driver does not support the new hooks, and vice versa.
>>
>> Note that the timecode field is gone, since there doesn't seem to be
>> in-kernel users. We can be added back in the reserved area if needed or
>> use the Request API to collect more metadata information from the
>> frame.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Helen Koike <helen.koike@...labora.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v5:
>> - migrate memory from v4l2_ext_buffer to v4l2_ext_plane
>> - return mem_offset to struct v4l2_ext_plane
>> - change sizes and reorder fields to avoid holes in the struct and make
>>   it the same for 32 and 64 bits
>>
>> Changes in v4:
>> - Use v4l2_ext_pix_format directly in the ioctl, drop v4l2_ext_format,
>> making V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_[OUTPUT,CAPTURE] the only valid types.
>> - Drop VIDIOC_EXT_EXPBUF, since the only difference from VIDIOC_EXPBUF
>> was that with VIDIOC_EXT_EXPBUF we could export multiple planes at once.
>> I think we can add this later, so I removed it from this RFC to simplify it.
>> - Remove num_planes field from struct v4l2_ext_buffer
>> - Add flags field to struct v4l2_ext_create_buffers
>> - Reformulate struct v4l2_ext_plane
>> - Fix some bugs caught by v4l2-compliance
>> - Rebased on top of media/master (post 5.8-rc1)
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>> - Rebased on top of media/master (post 5.4-rc1)
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Add reserved space to v4l2_ext_buffer so that new fields can be added
>>   later on
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-dev.c   |  29 ++-
>>  drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-ioctl.c | 353 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  include/media/v4l2-ioctl.h           |  26 ++
>>  include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h       |  90 +++++++
>>  4 files changed, 476 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h b/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h
>> index 7123c6a4d9569..334cafdd2be97 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/videodev2.h
>> @@ -996,6 +996,41 @@ struct v4l2_plane {
>>  	__u32			reserved[11];
>>  };
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * struct v4l2_ext_plane - extended plane buffer info
>> + * @buffer_length:	size of the entire buffer in bytes, should fit
>> + *			@offset + @plane_length
>> + * @plane_length:	size of the plane in bytes.
>> + * @mem_offset:		If V4L2_MEMORY_MMAP is used, then it can be a "cookie"
>> + *			that should be passed to mmap() called on the video node.
>> + * @userptr:		when memory is V4L2_MEMORY_USERPTR, a userspace pointer pointing
>> + *			to this plane.
>> + * @dmabuf_fd:		when memory is V4L2_MEMORY_DMABUF, a userspace file descriptor
>> + *			associated with this plane.
>> + * @offset:		offset in the memory buffer where the plane starts.
>> + * @memory:		enum v4l2_memory; the method, in which the actual video
>> + *			data is passed
>> + * @reserved:		extra space reserved for future fields, must be set to 0.
>> + *
>> + *
>> + * Buffers consist of one or more planes, e.g. an YCbCr buffer with two planes
>> + * can have one plane for Y, and another for interleaved CbCr components.
>> + * Each plane can reside in a separate memory buffer, or even in
>> + * a completely separate memory node (e.g. in embedded devices).
>> + */
>> +struct v4l2_ext_plane {
>> +	__u32 buffer_length;
>> +	__u32 plane_length;
>> +	union {
>> +		__u32 mem_offset;
>> +		__u64 userptr;
>> +		__s32 dmabuf_fd;
>> +	} m;
>> +	__u32 offset;
> 
> I'd rename this plane_offset. I think some reordering would make this struct easier
> to understand:
> 
> struct v4l2_ext_plane {
> 	__u32 buffer_length;
> 	__u32 plane_offset;
> 	__u32 plane_length;
> 	__u32 memory;
> 	union {
> 		__u32 mem_offset;
> 		__u64 userptr;
> 		__s32 dmabuf_fd;
> 	} m;
> 	__u32 reserved[4];
> };
> 
>> +	__u32 memory;
>> +	__u32 reserved[4];
>> +};

Ok, I'll apply this to the next version.

> 
> What is not clear is how to tell the different between a single buffer containing
> multiple planes, and using a separate buffer per plane. E.g. what would this look
> like for V4L2_PIX_FMT_YVU420, V4L2_PIX_FMT_YUV420M and a theoretical variant of
> V4L2_PIX_FMT_YUV420M where the luma plane has its own buffer and the two chroma
> planes are also combined in a single buffer?
> 
> I would guess that the m union is set to 0 if the plane is part of the buffer
> defined in the previous plane?

The difference would be if m are equal or differ between planes, example:

For V4L2_PIX_FMT_YVU420:

    Y:
        plane_offset = 0
        m.dmabuf_fd = 3
    Cb:
        plane_offset = 300
        m.dmabuf_fd = 3
    Cr:
        plane_offset = 375
        m.dmabuf_fd = 3

For V4L2_PIX_FMT_YVU420M:

    Y:
        plane_offset = 0
        m.dmabuf_fd = 4
    Cb:
        plane_offset = 0
        m.dmabuf_fd = 5
    Cr:
        plane_offset = 0
        m.dmabuf_fd = 6


Does it make sense?

> 
>> +
>>  /**
>>   * struct v4l2_buffer - video buffer info
>>   * @index:	id number of the buffer
>> @@ -1057,6 +1092,33 @@ struct v4l2_buffer {
>>  	};
>>  };
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * struct v4l2_ext_buffer - extended video buffer info
>> + * @index:	id number of the buffer
>> + * @type:	V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_CAPTURE or V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VIDEO_OUTPUT
>> + * @flags:	buffer informational flags
>> + * @field:	enum v4l2_field; field order of the image in the buffer
>> + * @timestamp:	frame timestamp
>> + * @sequence:	sequence count of this frame
>> + * @planes:	per-plane buffer information
>> + * @request_fd:	fd of the request that this buffer should use
>> + * @reserved:	extra space reserved for future fields, must be set to 0
>> + *
>> + * Contains data exchanged by application and driver using one of the Streaming
>> + * I/O methods.
>> + */
>> +struct v4l2_ext_buffer {
>> +	__u32 index;
>> +	__u32 type;
>> +	__u32 field;
>> +	__u32 sequence;
>> +	__u64 flags;
>> +	__u64 timestamp;
>> +	struct v4l2_ext_plane planes[VIDEO_MAX_PLANES];
>> +	__s32 request_fd;
>> +	__u32 reserved[9];
>> +};
> 
> Brainstorming:
> 
> Some ideas I have to make it easier to support mid stream resolution/colorimetry
> changes:
> 
> Adding width and height would support resolution changes (requires the use of
> CREATE_BUFS to ensure the allocated buffers are large enough, of course). If that
> information is provided here, then there are no race conditions.
> 
> Same for adding the colorimetry fields here, this too can change on the fly (esp.
> with HDMI), so reporting this information here avoids race conditions as well.

Right, do you think this is something we can discuss later in a different RFC?
So we can have a better view on how dynamic resolution change would be used?

We can add more reserved fields or maybe try to do something to what has been
discussed in about extensible system calls [1]

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/830666/

> 
> And thirdly, I would like to have a __u64 boot_timestamp field containing the
> CLOCK_BOOTTIME of when the vb2_buffer_done() was called. The problem with 'timestamp'
> is that for m2m devices it is just copied and that for other devices it can have
> different meanings depending on the timestamp buffer flags.
> 
> There also have been requests for CLOCK_BOOTTIME support, so this might be a good time
> to add support for this. That way you know exactly when the driver was finished with
> the buffer and that helps in detecting missed frames or instrumentation.

I don't mind adding it. Does it make sense to have both timestamp and boot_timestamp?

> 
>> +
>>  #ifndef __KERNEL__
>>  /**
>>   * v4l2_timeval_to_ns - Convert timeval to nanoseconds
>> @@ -2523,6 +2585,29 @@ struct v4l2_create_buffers {
>>  	__u32			reserved[6];
>>  };
>>  
>> +/**
>> + * struct v4l2_ext_create_buffers - VIDIOC_EXT_CREATE_BUFS argument
>> + * @index:	on return, index of the first created buffer
>> + * @count:	entry: number of requested buffers,
>> + *		return: number of created buffers
>> + * @memory:	enum v4l2_memory; buffer memory type
>> + * @capabilities: capabilities of this buffer type.
>> + * @format:	frame format, for which buffers are requested
>> + * @flags:	additional buffer management attributes (ignored unless the
>> + *		queue has V4L2_BUF_CAP_SUPPORTS_MMAP_CACHE_HINTS capability
>> + *		and configured for MMAP streaming I/O).
>> + * @reserved:	extra space reserved for future fields, must be set to 0
>> + */
>> +struct v4l2_ext_create_buffers {
>> +	__u32				index;
>> +	__u32				count;
>> +	__u32				memory;
>> +	__u32				capabilities;
>> +	struct v4l2_ext_pix_format	format;
> 
> The reality is that the only field that is ever used in the original v4l2_format
> struct is sizeimage. So this can be replaced with:
> 
> 	__u32				plane_size[VIDEO_MAX_PLANES];
> 
> (the field name I picked is debatable, but you get the idea)
> 
> The main purpose of CREATE_BUFS is to add new buffers with larger sizes than
> is needed for the current format. The original idea of using struct v4l2_format
> was that drivers would use the full format information to calculate the
> memory size, but that was just much too complicated to implement and nobody
> ever used that. Only the sizeimage field was ever used.

Right, I'll update this in next version, This should simplify things.


Thanks,
Helen

> 
>> +	__u32				flags;
>> +	__u32 reserved[5];
>> +};
>> +
>>  /*
>>   *	I O C T L   C O D E S   F O R   V I D E O   D E V I C E S
>>   *
>> @@ -2626,6 +2711,11 @@ struct v4l2_create_buffers {
>>  #define VIDIOC_G_EXT_PIX_FMT	_IOWR('V', 104, struct v4l2_ext_pix_format)
>>  #define VIDIOC_S_EXT_PIX_FMT	_IOWR('V', 105, struct v4l2_ext_pix_format)
>>  #define VIDIOC_TRY_EXT_PIX_FMT	_IOWR('V', 106, struct v4l2_ext_pix_format)
>> +#define VIDIOC_EXT_CREATE_BUFS	_IOWR('V', 107, struct v4l2_ext_create_buffers)
>> +#define VIDIOC_EXT_QUERYBUF	_IOWR('V', 108, struct v4l2_ext_buffer)
>> +#define VIDIOC_EXT_QBUF		_IOWR('V', 109, struct v4l2_ext_buffer)
>> +#define VIDIOC_EXT_DQBUF	_IOWR('V', 110, struct v4l2_ext_buffer)
>> +#define VIDIOC_EXT_PREPARE_BUF	_IOWR('V', 111, struct v4l2_ext_buffer)
>>  
>>  /* Reminder: when adding new ioctls please add support for them to
>>     drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-compat-ioctl32.c as well! */
>>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 	Hans
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists