From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71E8D106B533 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 13:03:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCCFD10E8C9; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 13:03:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=collabora.com header.i=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com header.b="W7b9Dzg8"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from sender4-pp-f112.zoho.com (sender4-pp-f112.zoho.com [136.143.188.112]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95AE310E67A; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:25:29 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1774365913; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=FHAKaU6BZH80IYFqEa3eAOZmceU7Hw+oHbexTK3eflxpH++56aFzspdGD7Fc12ynCOXfZQVJd9bcZWjwCFjsDJdXd/qtZatHC1Rud+V5OMP1eY3nO8BK1jkBLSVt4romPtgiJT6VcoNkg3hN76JhnHASYpkhGEYe0kg182x0twQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1774365913; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=MWYjgfX6VpVyfxxQYgJCWmWSXFOd4Jy+zVQGptpNyRU=; b=cuBVRg8nYCe9MzDT4bLrQ7fGmsLUudcZXpvvDk38PwW+lH4miAfyy83W0sHiPNHhxgO6MQ+El0w0S3e1iv3+uAqkxGZkh0lz2yrPy8qgzrzBWE6jsNiWUKTyRTfmRyXx+wcA4jAnFLGmgXbVYXgVQo4iLMD91DRQUOLchrS28rI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1774365913; s=zohomail; d=collabora.com; i=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com; h=From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:Subject:Subject:Date:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=MWYjgfX6VpVyfxxQYgJCWmWSXFOd4Jy+zVQGptpNyRU=; b=W7b9Dzg87cNtQZjUxQcIWP5d1fUlh74bGCuiDBpP7e1E7x+QckPPaaRL/YfpIHEY fr0OC1PYoNrmYBhJYsupkxZMdNtmuVq4nvkaiubS40pMBY1AIpRiXLCJinL7o4CivQT kYMBx9OBcg7SfRKOcdYRLXUEPo2cn2bjEgZMd/kk= Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1774365912399120.92841279798449; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 08:25:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Nicolas Frattaroli To: Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , Harry Wentland , Leo Li , Rodrigo Siqueira , Alex Deucher , Christian =?UTF-8?B?S8O2bmln?= , Ville =?UTF-8?B?U3lyasOkbMOk?= , Daniel Stone , Dmitry Baryshkov , Michel =?UTF-8?B?RMOkbnplcg==?= Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, kernel@collabora.com, Derek Foreman , Marius Vlad Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/3] Add "link bpc" DRM property Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 16:25:05 +0100 Message-ID: <4265353.aeNJFYEL58@workhorse> In-Reply-To: References: <20260319-link-bpc-v5-0-5306cd04a708@collabora.com> <8676926.T7Z3S40VBb@workhorse> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 13:03:04 +0000 X-BeenThere: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for AMD gfx List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: amd-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "amd-gfx" On Monday, 23 March 2026 18:27:41 Central European Standard Time Michel D= =C3=A4nzer wrote: > On 3/23/26 17:55, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote: > > > > "Someone might not understand its purpose" is, in my eyes, not a valid = reason to > > not have this property, [...] > Per my previous posts, that's not my concern. >=20 >=20 >=20 Then what is your concern? That the link-bpc property does not consider DSC and dithering? Two things which the max-bpc property also does not consider? Please clearly state where your problem with this property is (and not with how your understanding of the Weston MR uses it) so that I can make forward progress here. If all you want is a clearer description of the property in the comment that accompanies it, then I can do that, and I said I agree with this point. But you seem to be arguing from a position of not wanting the property to exist at all, which is not something I can address. Userspace needs a way to close the feedback loop here, or it won't be able to make the right content-specific trade-offs. Kind regards, Nicolas Frattaroli