#1671 NORM Gen2: DCON2 wishlist
Zarro Boogs per Child
bugtracker at laptop.org
Sun Jun 13 00:07:41 EDT 2010
#1671: DCON2 wishlist
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
Reporter: ajax | Owner: mlj
Type: enhancement | Status: closed
Priority: normal | Milestone: Gen2
Component: hardware | Version:
Resolution: fixed | Keywords:
Next_action: never set | Verified: 0
Deployment_affected: | Blockedby:
Blocking: |
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
Changes (by wad):
* status: assigned => closed
* next_action: => never set
* resolution: => fixed
Comment:
As I work on the specifications for the next DCON, I feel compelled to
reply to this ticket's comments (before closing it):
"The current DCONLOAD semantics are just broken" This comment shows
ignorance of the hardware signaling. Yes, it is an atomic command, but
one that can be aborted at any time, with little to no visible artifacts.
In the current (first) version of the DCON, if the DCONLOAD signal is
deasserted before control has been transferred to the DCON, control is not
transferred to the DCON and the system proceeds normally (never generating
the interrupt indicating that a DisplayLoad occurred. This behavior was
encountered in debugging #9869.) If the frame buffer has completed
loading and control has been switched, then there will be one frame
displayed from the DCON's frame buffer before transferring control back.
Note, however, that non-atomic control wouldn't improve this degenerate
case (where you realize you are modifying the frame buffer at the same
time you are transferring control to the DCON).
Continuously loading the DCON frame buffer would cost upwards of 50mW.
There is no disagreement about the transition back to host control.
Unfortunately, that isn't a problem with the DCON, rather a problem that
most SoC display controllers no longer support genlock (even of the
limited vertical kind). The LX used in XO-1 supported genlock, but it
multiplexed the sync. input signals with others that we needed, preventing
its use. More recent chipsets used in OLPC laptops (Via VX855, Marvell
A610) do not support genlock of their display controllers.
In an ideal world, frame rates could be arbitrarily set. In the real
world, memory and bus bandwidth constraints prevent such arbitrary
settings.
DPVL (Design Professionals Volleyball League ?) never really existed. The
rumors that the nice features were incorporated into DisplayPort are
untrue. It's real descendant is a proprietary and publicly undocumented
technology called "Smart Panel". Unfortunately, Smart Panel (which I'm
sure is somebody's trademark) is used mainly for small displays for
automotive applications. I do agree that a more intelligent interconnect
with the display is the right direction for future development, but it
requires that the display panel incorporate a full frame buffer (DCON) and
currently has little to no support in the marketplace.
The reason there is no register for reading the current state of the DCON
is that the register interface is 100Kbps I2C. In the time it takes to
read a register, 20 scan lines have passed.
Additional comments from Adam about the DCON may be found at:
http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2007-December/008624.html
One of the silicon bugs listed there, the fact that DCONBLANK is asserted
at the wrong time, will be fixed.
Regarding all the comments about black and white mode and color anti-
aliasing --- these features are being dropped from future DCON designs as
both the pixel layout is returning to a more conventional one and there is
no explicit B&W mode in future displays --- they are likely to provide a
slight amount of desaturated color in reflective mode.
--
Ticket URL: <http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/1671#comment:4>
One Laptop Per Child <http://laptop.org/>
OLPC bug tracking system
More information about the Bugs
mailing list