On Sat, Aug 30, 2025 at 09:30:01AM +0200, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2025 at 02:23, Dmitry Baryshkov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's not uncommon for the particular device to support only a subset of > > HDMI InfoFrames. It's not a big problem for the kernel, since we adopted > > a model of ignoring the unsupported Infoframes, but it's a bigger > > problem for the userspace: we end up having files in debugfs which do > > mot match what is being sent on the wire. > > > > Sort that out, making sure that all interfaces are consistent. > > Thanks for the series, it's a really good cleanup. > > I know that dw-hdmi-qp can support _any_ infoframe, by manually > packing it into the two GHDMI banks. So the supported set there is > 'all of the currently well-known ones, plus any two others, but only > two and not more'. I wonder if that has any effect on the interface > you were thinking about for userspace?
I was mostly concerned with the existing debugfs interface (as it is also used e.g. for edid-decode, etc). It seems "everything + 2 spare" is more or less common (ADV7511, MSM HDMI also have those. I don't have at hand the proper datasheet for LT9611 (non-UXC one), but I think its InfoFrames are also more or less generic). Maybe we should change debugfs integration to register the file when the frame is being enabled and removing it when it gets unset. Then in the long run we can add 'slots' and allocate some of the frames to the slots. E.g. ADV7511 would get 'software AVI', 'software SPD', 'auto AUDIO' + 2 generic slots (and MPEG InfoFrame which can probably be salvaged as another generic one)). MSM HDMI would get 'software AVI', 'software AUDIO' + 2 generic slots (+MPEG + obsucre HDMI which I don't want to use). Then the framework might be able to prioritize whether to use generic slots for important data (as DRM HDR, HDMI) or less important (SPD). -- With best wishes Dmitry
