search for: underscan_vborder_property

...t;content_protection = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { > + state->underscan.mode = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { > + state->underscan.hborder = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { > + state->underscan.vborder = val; > } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { > return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, > state, property, val); > @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_property(struct drm_connector *c...

Hello, This is an attempt at providing generic support for underscan connector props. We already have 3 drivers defining the same underscan, underscan vborder and underscan hborder properties (amd, radeon and nouveau) and I am about to add a new one, hence my proposal to put the prop parsing code in the core and add ->underscan fields to drm_connector_state. Note that I use this new

...t;content_protection = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { > + state->underscan.mode = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { > + state->underscan.hborder = val; > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { > + state->underscan.vborder = val; > } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { > return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, > state, property, val); > @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_property(struct drm_connector *c...

...-EINVAL; } state->content_protection = val; + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { + state->underscan.mode = val; + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { + state->underscan.hborder = val; + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { + state->underscan.vborder = val; } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, state, property, val); @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_property(struct drm_connector *connector, *val = state...

...or(state->state, connector, fence_ptr); + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { + state->underscan.mode = val; + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { + state->underscan.hborder = val; + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { + state->underscan.vborder = val; } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, state, property, val); @@ -799,6 +805,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_property(struct drm_connector *connector, *val = state-&...

Hello, This is an attempt at providing generic support for underscan connector props. We already have 3 drivers defining the same underscan, underscan vborder and underscan hborder properties (amd, radeon and nouveau) and I am about to add a new one, hence my proposal to put the prop parsing code in the core and add ->underscan fields to drm_connector_state. In this v2, I also converted the

...l; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { > > + state->underscan.mode = val; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { > > + state->underscan.hborder = val; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { > > + state->underscan.vborder = val; > > } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { > > return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, > > state, property, val); > > @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_propert...

Hello, This is an attempt at providing generic support for underscan connector props. We already have 3 drivers defining the same underscan, underscan vborder and underscan hborder properties (amd, radeon and nouveau) and I am about to add a new one, hence my proposal to put the prop parsing code in the core and add ->underscan fields to drm_connector_state. This v3 was based on the "VC4

...ector, > fence_ptr); >+ } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { >+ state->underscan.mode = val; >+ } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { >+ state->underscan.hborder = val; >+ } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { >+ state->underscan.vborder = val; > } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { > return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, > state, property, val); >@@ -799,6 +805,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_property(struct drm_connector *connecto...

...+ } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { >>> + state->underscan.mode = val; >>> + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { >>> + state->underscan.hborder = val; >>> + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { >>> + state->underscan.vborder = val; >>> } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { >>> return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, >>> state, property, val); >>> @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connec...

...t; + > + /** > + * @underscan_hborder_property: Optional connector underscan vertical > + * border (expressed in pixels). Used by the driver to adjust the > + * output image position and compensate an overscan done on the display > + * side. > + */ > + struct drm_property *underscan_vborder_property; I'm wondering why we're adding these new props when we already have the (slightly more flexible) margin properties for TV out. We could just reuse those AFAICS. > + > #define DRM_CONNECTOR_POLL_HPD (1 << 0) > #define DRM_CONNECTOR_POLL_CONNECT (1 << 1) > #defin...

...property: Optional connector underscan vertical >> > + * border (expressed in pixels). Used by the driver to adjust the >> > + * output image position and compensate an overscan done on the display >> > + * side. >> > + */ >> > + struct drm_property *underscan_vborder_property; >> >> I'm wondering why we're adding these new props when we already have the >> (slightly more flexible) margin properties for TV out. We could just >> reuse those AFAICS. > > I'm not against the idea, but I can't use > drm_mode_create_tv_proper...

...l; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_mode_property) { > > + state->underscan.mode = val; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { > > + state->underscan.hborder = val; > > + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { > > + state->underscan.vborder = val; > > } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { > > return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, > > state, property, val); > > @@ -1359,6 +1365,12 @@ drm_atomic_connector_get_propert...

...t;underscan_mode_property) { >>>> + state->underscan.mode = val; >>>> + } else if (property == connector->underscan_hborder_property) { >>>> + state->underscan.hborder = val; >>>> + } else if (property == connector->underscan_vborder_property) { >>>> + state->underscan.vborder = val; >>>> } else if (connector->funcs->atomic_set_property) { >>>> return connector->funcs->atomic_set_property(connector, >>>> state, property,...

...@underscan_hborder_property: Optional connector underscan vertical > > + * border (expressed in pixels). Used by the driver to adjust the > > + * output image position and compensate an overscan done on the display > > + * side. > > + */ > > + struct drm_property *underscan_vborder_property; > > I'm wondering why we're adding these new props when we already have the > (slightly more flexible) margin properties for TV out. We could just > reuse those AFAICS. I'm not against the idea, but I can't use drm_mode_create_tv_properties() directly, as most props...