[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/2] backlight: pwm_bl: support linear brightness to human eye
On 05/09/17 12:05, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 04/09/17 16:35, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> This patch series is a first RFC to know your opinion about implement
>> support to create brightness levels tables dinamically. I tried to argue
>> in every patch the specific reasons we think this can be interesting, to
>> sumup, the idea behind these patches is be able to pass via device tree
>> two parameters to the driver so it can calculate the brightness levels
>> based on the CIE 1931 lightness formula, which is what actually describes
>> how we perceive light.
>> I think that at least the maths involved can be improved, and I've still
>> some doubts. With current code if you create a table with a max PWM
>> value of 255 and 127 steps, the first numbers are repeated so I'm
>> thinking > that maybe we should skip/remove the repeated values. i.e.
>> have a table
>> like this,
>> [0, 1, 2, 3  ...  235, 240, 245, 250, 255]
>> instead of
>> [0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3  ...  235, 240, 245, 250, 255]
>> Well, I know there are things to improve but lets see your feedback first
>> before dedicate more time on it. The patches were tested on a couple of
>> devices but I'll test on more devices meanwhile we discuss about it.
> I'm not fully decided on this one but my initial reaction isn't to
> question the concept so much as to ask why the number of levels should
> go in the devicetree at all! We could just make brightness-levels
> optional and get the driver to pick sane curves by default.
> I'm sure we can debate what "sane" means for a couple of e-mails yet but
> in principle, given it knows the PWM max counter value, the driver
> should be able to calculate the "right" number of steps too. If we have
> that your core code remains but we don't have to complexify the device

... tree

Sorry. ;-)


> <strawman>
> Basically we prefer X (?100 like some of the Intel DRM drivers do for
> connector properties?) steps but we reduce the number of steps if the
> PWM is rather course and we can't get sufficiently different steps.
> </strawman>
> I guess the summary of what I'm saying is that if we can
> programmatically derive brightness curves then the number of steps is
> not really a property of the hardware and doesn't belong in devicetree.
> Daniel.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-05 13:09    [W:0.057 / U:4.952 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site