[PATCH 1/3] include: fb: Add definiton for window positioning structure

Ajay kumar
2011-09-21T07:18:27Z

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 20:08 +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
>> Hi Ajay,
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 08:56:57PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
>> > Hi Baruch,
>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il> wrote:
>> > > Hi Ajay,
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:30:39AM -0400, Ajay Kumar wrote:
>> > >> This patch adds a data structure definiton to hold framebuffer windows/planes.
>> > >> An ioctl number is also added to provide user access
>> > >> to change window position dynamically.
>> > >
>> > > [snip]
>> > >
>> > >> +/* Window overlaying */
>> > >> +struct fb_overlay_win_pos {
>> > >> + ? ? __u32 win_pos_x; ? ? ? ?/* x-offset from LCD(0,0) where window starts */
>> > >> + ? ? __u32 win_pos_y; ? ? ? ?/* y-offset from LCD(0,0) where window starts */
>> > >> +};
>> > >
>> > > Why not allow negative offsets where the left or upper part of the framebuffer
>> > > is hidden?
>> >
>> > Thanks for pointing it out. Are there drivers which place the overlay
>> > windows such that some part of the window is hidden from being
>> > displayed on the screen?
>>
>> I don't know. However, since this is new userspace ABI which should stay
>> compatible forever, we should make sure to do it right. Using __s32 instead of
>> __u32 won't limit us in the future.
>
> OMAP HW doesn't allow "funny" things like overlay being outside the
> visible area, i.e. negative position or size larger than the display.
> And my guess is that hardware rarely allow things like that, as it would
> just complicate the hardware without any gain.
>
> Out-of-display-overlays can of course be emulated by the software. But
> I'm not sure if it's good to add the complexity in the driver layer, as
> it could as well be handled in the userspace.
>
> Then again, a signed value would be future safer ("just in case"), and
> if the driver can just reject values it doesn't want to support, there's
> no real harm there either.

OK. I will consider this and modify it in the next version of patches.

Ajay