Re: [PATCH v11 03/22] drm: Add new general DRM property "color format"

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Sat, Mar 28, 2026 at 02:49:04AM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 01:56:06PM +0100, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> > On Thursday, 26 March 2026 18:58:25 Central European Standard Time Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 06:02:47PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 08:43:15PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 03:56:58PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 01:03:07PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 09:24:27AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 09:53:35PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 08:10:11PM +0100, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 24 March 2026 18:00:45 Central European Standard Time Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 05:01:07PM +0100, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > +enum drm_connector_color_format {
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	/**
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * @DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_AUTO: The driver or display protocol
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * helpers should pick a suitable color format. All implementations of a
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * specific display protocol must behave the same way with "AUTO", but
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * different display protocols do not necessarily have the same "AUTO"
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * semantics.
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 *
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * For HDMI, "AUTO" picks RGB, but falls back to YCbCr 4:2:0 if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * bandwidth required for full-scale RGB is not available, or the mode
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * is YCbCr 4:2:0-only, as long as the mode and output both support
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * YCbCr 4:2:0.
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 *
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * For display protocols other than HDMI, the recursive bridge chain
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * format selection picks the first chain of bridge formats that works,
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * as has already been the case before the introduction of the "color
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * format" property. Non-HDMI bridges should therefore either sort their
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * bus output formats by preference, or agree on a unified auto format
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * selection logic that's implemented in a common state helper (like
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * how HDMI does it).
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_AUTO = 0,
> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	/**
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * @DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_RGB444: RGB output format
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_RGB444,
> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	/**
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * @DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR444: YCbCr 4:4:4 output format (ie.
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * not subsampled)
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR444,
> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	/**
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * @DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR422: YCbCr 4:2:2 output format (ie.
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * with horizontal subsampling)
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR422,
> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	/**
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * @DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR420: YCbCr 4:2:0 output format (ie.
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 * with horizontal and vertical subsampling)
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	 */
> > > > > > > > > > > > +	DRM_CONNECTOR_COLOR_FORMAT_YCBCR420,
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Seems like this should document what the quantization range
> > > > > > > > > > > should be for each format.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > I don't think so? If you want per-component bit depth values,
> > > > > > > > > > DRM_FORMAT_* defines would be the appropriate values to use. This
> > > > > > > > > > enum is more abstract than that, and is there to communicate
> > > > > > > > > > YUV vs. RGB and chroma subsampling, with bit depth being handled
> > > > > > > > > > by other properties.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > If you mean the factor used for subsampling, then that'd only be
> > > > > > > > > > relevant if YCBCR410 was supported where one chroma plane isn't
> > > > > > > > > > halved but quartered in resolution. I suspect 4:1:0 will never
> > > > > > > > > > be added; no digital display protocol standard supports it to my
> > > > > > > > > > knowledge, and hopefully none ever will.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > No, I mean the quantization range (16-235 vs. 0-255 etc).
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > The i915 behaviour is that YCbCr is always limited range,
> > > > > > > > > RGB can either be full or limited range depending on the 
> > > > > > > > > "Broadcast RGB" property and other related factors.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > So far the HDMI state has both the format and quantization range as
> > > > > > > > different fields. I'm not sure we need to document the range in the
> > > > > > > > format field, maybe only mention it's not part of the format but has a
> > > > > > > > field of its own?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I think we only have it for RGB (on some drivers only?). For YCbCr
> > > > > > > I think the assumption is limited range everywhere.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > But I'm not really concerned about documenting struct members.
> > > > > > > What I'm talking about is the *uapi* docs. Surely userspace
> > > > > > > will want to know what the new property actually does so the
> > > > > > > uapi needs to be documented properly. And down the line some
> > > > > > > new driver might also implement the wrong behaviour if there
> > > > > > > is no clear specification.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Ack
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > So I'm thinking (or perhaps hoping) the rule might be something like:
> > > > > > > - YCbCr limited range 
> > > > > > > - RGB full range if "Broadcast RGB" property is not present
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Isn't it much more complicated than that for HDMI though? My
> > > > > > recollection was that any VIC but VIC1 would be limited range, and
> > > > > > anything else full range?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Do we have some driver that implements the CTA-861 CE vs. IT mode
> > > > > logic but doesn't expose the "Broadcast RGB" property? I was hoping
> > > > > those would always go hand in hand now.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sure. i915 and the HDMI state helpers handle it properly (I
> > > > think?) but it looks like only vc4 registers the Broadcast RGB property
> > > > and uses the HDMI state helpers.
> > > > 
> > > > And it looks like amdgpu registers Broadcast RGB but doesn't use
> > > > drm_default_rgb_quant_range() which seems suspicious?
> > > 
> > > If they want just manual full vs. limited then they should
> > > limit the property to not expose the "auto" option at all.
> > > 
> > > amdgpu also ties this in with the "colorspace" property, which
> > > originally in i915 only controlled the infoframes/etc. But on
> > > amdgpu it now controls various aspects of output color
> > > transformation. The end result is that the property is a complete
> > > mess with most of the values making no sense. And for whatever
> > > reason everyone involved refused to remove/deprecate the
> > > nonsensical values :/
> > > 
> > > Looks like this series should make sure the documentation for
> > > the "colorspace" property is in sync with the new property
> > > as well. Currently now it's giving conflicting information.
> > > 
> > 
> > I take it the problematic information is in
> > 
> >     * DOC: standard connector properties
> >     *
> >     * Colorspace:
> > 
> > and probably specifically BT2020_YCC's (and BT2020_RGB's?) insistence
> > that they "produce RGB content".
> > 
> > I think we probably just have to change the statement "The variants
> > BT2020_RGB and BT2020_YCC are equivalent and the driver chooses between
> > RGB and YCbCr on its own."
> > 
> > The "on its own" here would get turned into "based on the color format
> > property".
> > 
> > Speaking of i915, that patch is one of the very few (5) patches in
> > this series still lacking a review (hint hint nudge nudge). I'd like
> > to get some more feedback on the remaining patches before I send out
> > another revision, so that it's hopefully not just docs changes (I
> > know better than to think those patches must be perfect and won't
> > need revision.)
> 
> The i915 code around this is already a big mess, and I don't really
> adding to that mess. So I think we'll need to do some refactoring before
> we add anything there. I already started typing something and so far
> it looks fairly straightforward, so I should have something soon.

OK, posted something
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-gfx/20260330235339.29479-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com/T/#m7c349478ca6c856fbc68d5e2178f1aa31678a05f

Are the wayland/compositor/color management folks on board with
these new properties? I don't think I see the usual suspects on
the cc list.

> 
> While doing that several questions came to my mind though:
> 
> * More interactions with the colorspace property, but I sent
>   a separate mail already about that
> 
> * Which conversion matrix to use, and the answer I suspect
>   should be "ask the colorspace property", as mentioned in the
>   other mail
> 
> * Should we flat out reject color formats (and I suppose also
>   colorspace prop values) the sink doesn't claim to support?
> 
>   If yes, then I think we'll have to forget about adding anything 
>   to i915 MST code. The way the MST stuff works is that if one
>   stream needs a modeset then all the related streams get modeset
>   as well. Thus if the user replaces a monitor getting fed with a
>   YCbCr stream just as another stream is being modeset, then the
>   entire atomic commit could fail due to the YCbCr stream getting
>   rejected.
> 
>   I think eventually we might have to invent some mechanism where
>   all the input into the modeset computation is cached somehow,
>   and said cache updated only on explicit userspace modesets.
>   Either that or we have to come up  with a way to skip some of
>   the calculations that depend on external factors. Either way
>   it's going to be a pain.
> 
>   OTOH if we don't mind feeding the sink with stuff it can't
>   understand, then I suppose we might add YCbCr 4:4:4 support
>   for MST. It shouldn't be any different from RGB apart from
>   the RGB->YCbCr conversion, which is handled elsewhere. But
>   YCbCr 4:2:0 is definitely out either way, the MST code has
>   no support for that currently.
> 
> -- 
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel