linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] media: hantro: HEVC: unconditionnaly set pps_{cb/cr}_qp

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 3 May 2022 11:48:37 -0300
From:   Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>
To:     Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...labora.com>
Cc:     p.zabel@...gutronix.de, mchehab@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jon@...ocrew.net, aford173@...il.com,
        kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] media: hantro: HEVC: unconditionnaly set
 pps_{cb/cr}_qp_offset values

On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 03:55:29PM +0200, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
> Always set pps_cb_qp_offset and pps_cr_qp_offset values in Hantro/G2
> register whatever is V4L2_HEVC_PPS_FLAG_PPS_SLICE_CHROMA_QP_OFFSETS_PRESENT
> flag value.
> The vendor code does the case to set these values.

s/case/same

> This fix conformance test CAINIT_G_SHARP_3.
> 
> Fluster HEVC score is increase by one with this patch.
> 

Saying "score is increased by one" is not all that useful.

I still believe seeing the Fluster score would be adding real
information.

The score you have without this patch, and using upstream GStreamer
is the "current" score. Then the score you get with the patch applied,
is the score you get after the fix.

And this is actually good as you would also give more information
by clarifying the score is the result of GStreamer (commit $sha)
plus Linux.

> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...labora.com>

Patch looks fine, but I believe you still have some challenges on the commit
descriptions, and so we iterate a lot on them.

How about you proof-read them first (or you ask colleagues to proof-read
them)?

A useful tip I've profit from is to let patches sit for a few days,
then re-read and amend the commit before sending them.

Reviewed-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>

Thanks!
Ezequiel

> ---
>  drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_g2_hevc_dec.c | 9 ++-------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_g2_hevc_dec.c b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_g2_hevc_dec.c
> index 6deb31b7b993..503f4b028bc5 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_g2_hevc_dec.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_g2_hevc_dec.c
> @@ -194,13 +194,8 @@ static void set_params(struct hantro_ctx *ctx)
>  		hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_max_cu_qpd_depth, 0);
>  	}
>  
> -	if (pps->flags & V4L2_HEVC_PPS_FLAG_PPS_SLICE_CHROMA_QP_OFFSETS_PRESENT) {
> -		hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cb_qp_offset, pps->pps_cb_qp_offset);
> -		hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cr_qp_offset, pps->pps_cr_qp_offset);
> -	} else {
> -		hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cb_qp_offset, 0);
> -		hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cr_qp_offset, 0);
> -	}
> +	hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cb_qp_offset, pps->pps_cb_qp_offset);
> +	hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_cr_qp_offset, pps->pps_cr_qp_offset);
>  
>  	hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_filt_offset_beta, pps->pps_beta_offset_div2);
>  	hantro_reg_write(vpu, &g2_filt_offset_tc, pps->pps_tc_offset_div2);
> -- 
> 2.32.0
>