After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 748560 - GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property
GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-desktop
Classification: Core
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Desktop Maintainers
Desktop Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-04-27 23:32 UTC by Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail)
Modified: 2015-04-28 16:20 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property (5.74 KB, patch)
2015-04-27 23:32 UTC, Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail)
committed Details | Review

Description Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-27 23:32:30 UTC
This is a patch we've used in Endless for quite some time. It doesn't actually do much -- it just adds a few APIs and passes things down to mutter, but it helps when building our fork of mutter / eos-hell, due to the changed API.

Should be fairly self-explanatory.
Comment 1 Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-27 23:32:35 UTC
Created attachment 302489 [details] [review]
GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property

To get and set whether overscan compensation is active in a given
output.
Comment 2 Bastien Nocera 2015-04-28 08:55:13 UTC
Review of attachment 302489 [details] [review]:

I don't understand how this will fix each and every TV screen. Don't we need something more detailed than this? If we don't, then I'd really like to see a reference to why it doesn't (eg. this commit could point to the mutter commit, which explains it fully).

::: libgnome-desktop/gnome-rr-config.c
@@ +1177,3 @@
 			       g_variant_new_parsed ("{ 'primary': <%b>,"
+						     "  'presentation': <%b>,"
+						     "  'underscanning': <%b> }",

I don't really like "underscanning" as a term. "underscan_activated", "underscan_on"?
Comment 3 Bastien Nocera 2015-04-28 08:56:42 UTC
I couldn't find the matching mutter patch.
Comment 4 Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-28 15:12:57 UTC
https://git.gnome.org/browse/mutter/commit/?id=cc53d48fa85a7efab2deeddea0a4a439784b20cf
Comment 5 Bastien Nocera 2015-04-28 15:53:29 UTC
In that patch there's:
+  /* XXX: Also implement underscan border */

Do we still want to do that?

The patch is fine as-is then. It uses the same terms as mutter, and should be extensible if mutter exports the underscan border.
Comment 6 Bastien Nocera 2015-04-28 15:54:17 UTC
Comment on attachment 302489 [details] [review]
GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property

Looks good to commit to master for GNOME 3.18. Make sure it's branched.
Comment 7 Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-28 15:55:49 UTC
(Oh, you beat me to it. I was drafting a better response)

The kernel provides us with three options: "underscan", "underscan hborder" and "underscan vborder". Currently, mutter implements the policy for these three, based on this "is_underscanning" property. The current policy is "the border is 5% of the current mode", which works well enough in our testing for most TVs out there, but every TV is slightly different.

I'm not sure if it makes sense for us to build a slider for border values. Note that due to technical limitations on how Endless implemented it in the xf86-video-intel driver, we can't have a smooth slider.

Either way, this is the simple API.

Also, just a note, this mutter API isn't used yet, I'm totally fine with changing it if you don't like it.
Comment 8 Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-28 15:58:11 UTC
(In reply to Bastien Nocera from comment #5)
> In that patch there's:
> +  /* XXX: Also implement underscan border */
> 
> Do we still want to do that?

Was done in the followup: https://git.gnome.org/browse/mutter/commit/?id=c68e43a97f544b9d3a7845a3a7e1e21ebd638dec
Comment 9 Bastien Nocera 2015-04-28 16:02:56 UTC
(In reply to Jasper St. Pierre from comment #7)
> Also, just a note, this mutter API isn't used yet, I'm totally fine with
> changing it if you don't like it.

No, that looks fine. The API name uses the same name as the X property. Go for it.
Comment 10 Jasper St. Pierre (not reading bugmail) 2015-04-28 16:20:23 UTC
Attachment 302489 [details] pushed as ee25e90 - GnomeRR: Add support for the underscan property