Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC v2 02/22] drm: Add Enhanced Gamma and color lut range attributes

Harry Wentland
2021-11-10T15:18:14Z

On 2021-11-10 06:55, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 10:49:24AM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 00:02:16 +0200
>> Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 03:47:58PM -0500, Harry Wentland wrote:
>>>> On 2021-11-08 04:54, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 12:27:56 -0400
>>>>> Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2021-11-04 04:38, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 11:08:13 -0400
>>>>>>> Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2021-09-06 17:38, Uma Shankar wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Existing LUT precision structure is having only 16 bit
>>>>>>>>> precision. This is not enough for upcoming enhanced hardwares
>>>>>>>>> and advance usecases like HDR processing. Hence added a new
>>>>>>>>> structure with 32 bit precision values.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This also defines a new structure to define color lut ranges,
>>>>>>>>> along with related macro definitions and enums. This will help
>>>>>>>>> describe multi segmented lut ranges in the hardware.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> include/uapi/drm/drm_mode.h | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+)
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>>> If the framebuffer is not in FP16 the question then becomes how
>>>>>> the integer pixel values relate to LUT addressing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Traditionally, and in any API I've seen (GL, Vulkan), a usual mapping
>>>>> is to match minimum unsigned integer value to 0.0, and unsigned maximum
>>>>> integer value to 1.0. This is how things work on the cable too, right?
>>>>> (Also taking full vs. limited range video signal into account. And
>>>>> conversion to cable-YUV if that happens.)
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want integer format FB values to map to something else, then you
>>>>> have to tag the FB with that range information, somehow. New UAPI.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On the cable we send integer values, not floating point. AMD HW uses
>>>> floating point internally, though, and the PWL API defines floating
>>>> point entries, so on some level we need to be clear what the floating
>>>> point entries mean. Either we document that to be [0.0, 1.0] or we
>>>> have some UAPI to define it. I'm leaning toward the latter but have
>>>> to think about it some more.
>>>
>>> As for Intel hw if you have an integer pixel value of 0xff... (with
>>> however many bits you have with a specific pixel format) it will get
>>> extended to 0.fff... (to whatever precision the pipe has internally).
>>> So if we go by that a fixed point 1.0 value in the proposed
>>> drm_color_lut_range would be considered just outside the gamut. And
>>> pretty sure fp16 input of 1.0 should also result in a 0.fff... internal
>>> value as well [1]. I think that definition pretty much matches how GL
>>> UNORM<->float conversion works as well.
>>
>> Does it work that way in GL though?
>>
>> I've always thought that with GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, 0xff maps to 1.0, not
>> 255.0/256.0.
>>
>> Taking a random spec: OpenGL ES 2.0.25
>>
>> Section 2.1.2 Data Conversions says:
>>
>> Normalized unsigned integers represent numbers in the range
>> [0, 1]. The conversion from a normalized unsigned integer c to
>> the corresponding floating-point f is defined as
>> f = c / (2^b - 1)
>>
>> Note how the divisor has -1.
>
> That seems to match what I said, or at least tried to say (~0 <-> 1.0 in
> float). drm_color_lut_range being fixed point would follow the ~0 side of
> that. Or at least that interpretation would very easily map to our hw.
>

If I understand you right Intel HW represents 0xff (assuming 8 bpc) as
the largest (representable) float that is less than 1.0. That float would
be bigger than 255.0/256.0 but smaller than 256.0/256.0.

Harry