On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:31:32AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 06:01:06PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:35:41PM +0530, Pankaj Bharadiya wrote:
Introduce new scaling filter property to allow userspace to select the driver's default scaling filter or Nearest-neighbor(NN) filter for upscaling operations on crtc/plane.
Drivers can set up this property for a plane by calling drm_plane_enable_scaling_filter() and for a CRTC by calling drm_crtc_enable_scaling_filter().
NN filter works by filling in the missing color values in the upscaled image with that of the coordinate-mapped nearest source pixel value.
NN filter for integer multiple scaling can be particularly useful for for pixel art games that rely on sharp, blocky images to deliver their distinctive look.
Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bharadiya pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com Signed-off-by: Shashank Sharma shashank.sharma@intel.com Signed-off-by: Ankit Nautiyal ankit.k.nautiyal@intel.com
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_uapi.c | 8 +++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c | 16 ++++++++++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_config.c | 13 ++++++++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/drm/drm_crtc.h | 10 +++++++++ include/drm/drm_mode_config.h | 6 ++++++ include/drm/drm_plane.h | 14 +++++++++++++ 7 files changed, 102 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_uapi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_uapi.c index a1e5e262bae2..4e3c1f3176e4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_uapi.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_uapi.c @@ -435,6 +435,8 @@ static int drm_atomic_crtc_set_property(struct drm_crtc *crtc, return ret; } else if (property == config->prop_vrr_enabled) { state->vrr_enabled = val;
- } else if (property == config->scaling_filter_property) {
state->scaling_filter = val;I think we want a per-plane/per-crtc prop for this. If we start adding more filters we are surely going to need different sets for different hw blocks.
In the past we've only done that once we have a demonstrated need. Usually the patch to move the property to a per-object location isn't a lot of churn.
Seems silly to not do it from the start when we already know there is hardware out there that has different capabilities per hw block.