[RFC] libcamera: lc-compliance: Add initial set of per frame control tests
David Plowman
david.plowman at raspberrypi.com
Mon Mar 4 12:35:41 CET 2024
Hi Stefan
On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 at 13:22, Stefan Klug <stefan.klug at ideasonboard.com> wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Am 01.03.24 um 13:04 schrieb David Plowman:
> > Hi Stefan
> >
> > On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 at 11:22, Stefan Klug <stefan.klug at ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi David,
> >>
> >> thanks for your comment. This is the same message I sent before, but with proper
> >> linewrapping - sorry about that.
> >>
> >> Am 01.03.24 um 08:56 schrieb David Plowman:
> >>> Hi Stefan
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for posting this and re-starting the discussion of per-frame controls.
> >>>
> >>> Could you perhaps just summarise exactly what you mean by per-frame
> >>> controls, that is to say, what is being tested here?
> >>>
> >>> Eye-balling the code, I think I understood that:
> >>>
> >>> * You are setting controls in a specific request.
> >>> * When that request completes, you are expecting the controls to have
> >>> taken effect in the images that were returned with that request (but
> >>> not earlier).
> >>>
> >>> But I wasn't totally sure - have I understood that correctly?
> >>>
> >>> Also, do we know if any other pipeline handlers implement this
> >>> behaviour? Do folks think that all pipeline handlers should implement
> >>> this behaviour?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks again!
> >>> David
> >>>
> >> You are completely right. This needs a bit more context.
> >>
> >> It all started on my side with implementing metadata support in SimplePipeline
> >> handler. I soon hit some corner cases where I expected things to behave
> >> differently in cooperation with DelayedControls. So either I hit a bug in
> >> DelayedControls or I didn't fully understand the concept behind it.
> >>
> >> I ended up changing several things in DelayedControls which I believe where
> >> correct. The question then was how to prove correctness as all current users of
> >> DelayedControls where ISP implementations. There are some unittests, but the
> >> order of calls in these tests also felt counterintuitive (might well be, that
> >> it's just missing knowledge on my side).
> >>
> >> In that area there were also no tests in lc-compliance which tested the
> >> behaviour of an actual sensor/isp combination. So I started to write these tests
> >> with my personal expectation of how I believe things should work. These tests
> >> pass on my SimplePipeline. I also tried to massage the rkisp pipeline to pass
> >> these tests and hit some corners where work would be required.
> >>
> >> Before digging deeper into that I believe it makes sense to see if my
> >> expectations are correct and if a broader audience agrees to them. So here we
> >> are, that's the reason for the RFC.
> >>
> >> Now on to the technical details:
> >> Yes my expectation on per-frame-controls would be: If I queue something for
> >> frame x, I expect that the system tries to fullfill exacty that request (and
> >> never earlier). I'm well aware that this will not be possible in every case when
> >> an ISP is involved, so the ISP should do the best it can, but the metadata
> >> should reflect what was actually achieved. All the tests are currently for
> >> manual mode, so no regulation is involved (at least for the params I test).
> >>
> >> Do you agree with these assumptions? Looking forward to your opinion.
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification, and glad that I've understood!
> >
> > A bit of context from our side... We looked at and implemented a
> > per-frame controls solution for the Raspberry Pi back in summer 2022.
> > I would say there were a couple of differences:
> >
> > 1. We included a mechanism for reporting failure cases. The only real
> > failure case we have is failing to update camera exposure/gain
> > settings in time because there is quite a short window in which to
> > service the camera frame interrupts (especially when the system is
> > busy and the framerate is fast).
>
> That's interesting. Could you explain the mechanics you used for that
> feedback or point me to a patchset? Would be interesting to see which
> failure cases you modelled. How did you test these?
The last time we did any work on this was last summer for a libcamera
F2F in Prague. I think this
https://github.com/naushir/libcamera/tree/pfc_update was the code we
were running at that time. Obviously things have moved on since then,
not least the existence of Pi 5, which will need handling as well.
The way the feedback worked was that you got a sequence number every
time you submitted a request with controls in it (distinct from the
request sequence number), which we called the "submit id". Every
request that completed contained one of these sequence numbers
indicating which the most recent controls were that had been applied,
and this was known as the "sync id". So to ask "does this request
implement the controls that I set in it when I queued it?" you would
check "requset->syncId == request->submitId".
> >
> > The mechanism allowed the application to check whether controls had
> > been applied as expected, or whether they'd been delayed to the next
> > frame. It told you whether they'd got "merged" with the next set of
> > controls, or whether all the controls are now running "a frame late".
> >
> > 2. We implemented our scheme in the same way as you've described,
> > where the request where you set the controls has the first images that
> > fulfill the request. We called this "Android mode" though tbh I'm not
> > sure whether or not this really is what Android does!!!
> >
> > Although in the end we decided we didn't like this behaviour so much
> > because controls get delayed to the back of all the requests that have
> > been queued (and we normally queue quite a lot so as to avoid the risk
>
> Why was it necessary to move them to the back of all request? I guess in
> a typical usecase most requests would not contain controls (at least not
> from user side). So there would be a way to apply them as early in the
> queue as possible. I guess I'm missing somethimng here.
Sorry, I'm not being super clear! We never "moved" controls to the
back of the requests, the problem is that when you queue a request
with some controls in it, those controls are necessarily behind all
the other requests that you queued previously. So you have potentially
many extra frames of latency.
But you're exactly right, most requests don't contain any controls, so
we used to move the controls up the request queue so that they would
happen earlier.
>
> > of frame drops). So we also added "Raspberry Pi mode" where controls
> > are applied earlier.
> >
> > In principle I would be happy to let the Pi run in either mode
> > ("Android" or "Pi"), so long as we can choose "Pi mode" for our
> > applications. In both cases the same reporting mechanism told the
> > application exactly when the controls had been applied, so that
> > applications could be "mode" agnostic.
> >
> > Since Summer 2022, per-frame controls have not really progressed so
> > far as I know. We are intending to resurrect our per-frame controls
> > implementation again once we've got over the Pi 5 libcamera
> > integration, so I'm very happy to be resuming this discussion.
>
> Sure. Would be great if we could come up with a set of tests that wee
> all agree on.
I agree! Though the last 18 months suggests to me that we're not there yet.
There's currently work going on that splits buffers out of requests.
To me, the problem with the control lists suggests that possibly
controls should have their own queues and be removed from requests as
well. At which point this all becomes an even bigger discussion.
So I'm kind of sorry to be listing all the ways in which per-frame
controls are an unresolved problem, but not really knowing where it
goes from here. Nonetheless, we are wanting to move forward once the
Pi 5 integration is out of the way.
David
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
>
> >
> > Thanks!
> > David
> >
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Stefan
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 17:01, Stefan Klug <stefan.klug at ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> These tests check if controls (only exposure time and analogue gain at
> >>>> the moment) get applied on the frame they were requested for.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is tested by looking at the metadata and additionally by
> >>>> calculating a mean brightness on a centered rect of 20x20 pixels.
> >>>>
> >>>> Until today, these tests where only run on a project specific branch
> >>>> with a modified simple pipeline. In theory they should pass on a
> >>>> current master :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Current test setup: imx219 with simple pipeline on an imx8mp.
> >>>> Modifications of either the exposure delay or the gain delay in
> >>>> the camera_sensor class resulted in test failures.
> >>>> Which is exactly what this test shall proove.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Klug <stefan.klug at ideasonboard.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/capture_test.cpp | 39 ++++
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/meson.build | 2 +
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.cpp | 214 ++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.h | 41 ++++
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.cpp | 4 +-
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.h | 2 +-
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.cpp | 135 +++++++++++
> >>>> src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.h | 53 +++++
> >>>> 8 files changed, 487 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>> create mode 100644 src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.cpp
> >>>> create mode 100644 src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.h
> >>>> create mode 100644 src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.cpp
> >>>> create mode 100644 src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.h
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/capture_test.cpp b/src/apps/lc-compliance/capture_test.cpp
> >>>> index 1dcfcf92..43fe59f3 100644
> >>>> --- a/src/apps/lc-compliance/capture_test.cpp
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/capture_test.cpp
> >>>> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> >>>> #include <gtest/gtest.h>
> >>>>
> >>>> #include "environment.h"
> >>>> +#include "per_frame_controls.h"
> >>>> #include "simple_capture.h"
> >>>>
> >>>> using namespace libcamera;
> >>>> @@ -133,3 +134,41 @@ INSTANTIATE_TEST_SUITE_P(CaptureTests,
> >>>> testing::Combine(testing::ValuesIn(ROLES),
> >>>> testing::ValuesIn(NUMREQUESTS)),
> >>>> SingleStream::nameParameters);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Test Per frame controls
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +TEST_F(SingleStream, testFramePreciseExposureChange)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + PerFrameControls capture(camera_);
> >>>> + capture.configure(StreamRole::Viewfinder);
> >>>> + capture.testFramePreciseExposureChange();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TEST_F(SingleStream, testFramePreciseGainChange)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + PerFrameControls capture(camera_);
> >>>> + capture.configure(StreamRole::Viewfinder);
> >>>> + capture.testFramePreciseGainChange();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TEST_F(SingleStream, testExposureGainIsAppliedOnFirstFrame)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + PerFrameControls capture(camera_);
> >>>> + capture.configure(StreamRole::Viewfinder);
> >>>> + capture.testExposureGainIsAppliedOnFirstFrame();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TEST_F(SingleStream, testExposureGainFromFirstRequestGetsApplied)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + PerFrameControls capture(camera_);
> >>>> + capture.configure(StreamRole::Viewfinder);
> >>>> + capture.testExposureGainFromFirstRequestGetsApplied();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TEST_F(SingleStream, testExposureGainFromFirstAndSecondRequestGetsApplied)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + PerFrameControls capture(camera_);
> >>>> + capture.configure(StreamRole::Viewfinder);
> >>>> + capture.testExposureGainFromFirstAndSecondRequestGetsApplied();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/meson.build b/src/apps/lc-compliance/meson.build
> >>>> index c792f072..2a6f52af 100644
> >>>> --- a/src/apps/lc-compliance/meson.build
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/meson.build
> >>>> @@ -15,7 +15,9 @@ lc_compliance_sources = files([
> >>>> 'capture_test.cpp',
> >>>> 'environment.cpp',
> >>>> 'main.cpp',
> >>>> + 'per_frame_controls.cpp',
> >>>> 'simple_capture.cpp',
> >>>> + 'time_sheet.cpp',
> >>>> ])
> >>>>
> >>>> lc_compliance = executable('lc-compliance', lc_compliance_sources,
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.cpp b/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.cpp
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 00000000..70fc44ac
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.cpp
> >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
> >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2024, Ideas on Board Oy
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * per_frame_controls.cpp - Tests for per frame controls
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +#include "per_frame_controls.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <gtest/gtest.h>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include "time_sheet.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +using namespace libcamera;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +PerFrameControls::PerFrameControls(std::shared_ptr<Camera> camera)
> >>>> + : SimpleCapture(camera)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +std::shared_ptr<TimeSheet> PerFrameControls::startCaptureWithTimeSheet(unsigned int framesToCapture, const ControlList *controls)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + ControlList ctrls(camera_->controls().idmap());
> >>>> + /* Ensure defined default values */
> >>>> + ctrls.set(controls::AeEnable, false);
> >>>> + ctrls.set(controls::AeExposureMode, controls::ExposureCustom);
> >>>> + ctrls.set(controls::ExposureTime, 10000);
> >>>> + ctrls.set(controls::AnalogueGain, 1.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (controls) {
> >>>> + ctrls.merge(*controls, true);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + start(&ctrls);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + queueCount_ = 0;
> >>>> + captureCount_ = 0;
> >>>> + captureLimit_ = framesToCapture;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + auto timeSheet = std::make_shared<TimeSheet>(captureLimit_, camera_->controls().idmap());
> >>>> + timeSheet_ = timeSheet;
> >>>> + return timeSheet;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +int PerFrameControls::queueRequest(Request *request)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + queueCount_++;
> >>>> + if (queueCount_ > captureLimit_)
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + auto ts = timeSheet_.lock();
> >>>> + if (ts) {
> >>>> + ts->prepareForQueue(request, queueCount_ - 1);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + return camera_->queueRequest(request);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::requestComplete(Request *request)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto ts = timeSheet_.lock();
> >>>> + if (ts) {
> >>>> + ts->handleCompleteRequest(request);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + captureCount_++;
> >>>> + if (captureCount_ >= captureLimit_) {
> >>>> + loop_->exit(0);
> >>>> + return;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + request->reuse(Request::ReuseBuffers);
> >>>> + if (queueRequest(request))
> >>>> + loop_->exit(-EINVAL);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::runCaptureSession()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + Stream *stream = config_->at(0).stream();
> >>>> + const std::vector<std::unique_ptr<FrameBuffer>> &buffers = allocator_->buffers(stream);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Queue the recommended number of reqeuests. */
> >>>> + for (const std::unique_ptr<FrameBuffer> &buffer : buffers) {
> >>>> + std::unique_ptr<Request> request = camera_->createRequest();
> >>>> + request->addBuffer(stream, buffer.get());
> >>>> + queueRequest(request.get());
> >>>> + requests_.push_back(std::move(request));
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Run capture session. */
> >>>> + loop_ = new EventLoop();
> >>>> + loop_->exec();
> >>>> + stop();
> >>>> + delete loop_;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::testFramePreciseExposureChange()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto timeSheet = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(10);
> >>>> + auto &ts = *timeSheet;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +
> >>>> + ts[3].controls().set(controls::ExposureTime, 5000);
> >>>> + //wait a few frames to settle
> >>>> + ts[6].controls().set(controls::ExposureTime, 20000);
> >>>> + ts.printAllInfos();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[5].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 5000, 20);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[6].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 20000, 20);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* No increase just before setting exposure */
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[5].getBrightnessChange(), 1.0, 0.05) << "Brightness changed too much before the expected time of change (control delay too high?).";
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * Todo: The change is brightness was a bit low (Exposure time increase by 4x resulted in a brightness increase of < 2).
> >>>> + * This should be investigated.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + EXPECT_GT(ts[6].getBrightnessChange(), 1.3) << "Brightness in frame " << 6 << " did not increase as expected (reference: "
> >>>> + << ts[3].getSpotBrightness() << " current: " << ts[6].getSpotBrightness() << " )" << std::endl;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* No increase just after setting exposure */
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[7].getBrightnessChange(), 1.0, 0.05) << "Brightness changed too much after the expected time of change (control delay too low?).";
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* No increase just after setting exposure */
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[8].getBrightnessChange(), 1.0, 0.05) << "Brightness changed too much2 frames after the expected time of change (control delay too low?).";
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::testFramePreciseGainChange()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto timeSheet = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(10);
> >>>> + auto &ts = *timeSheet;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + ts[3].controls().set(controls::AnalogueGain, 1.0);
> >>>> + //wait a few frames to settle
> >>>> + ts[6].controls().set(controls::AnalogueGain, 4.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[5].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 1.0, 0.1);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[6].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 4.0, 0.1);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* No increase just before setting gain */
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[5].getBrightnessChange(), 1.0, 0.05) << "Brightness changed too much before the expected time of change (control delay too high?).";
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * Todo: I see a brightness change of roughly half the expected one. This is not yet understood and needs investigation
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + EXPECT_GT(ts[6].getBrightnessChange(), 1.7) << "Brightness in frame " << 6 << " did not increase as expected (reference: "
> >>>> + << ts[5].getSpotBrightness() << " current: " << ts[6].getSpotBrightness() << " )" << std::endl;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* No increase just after setting gain */
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[7].getBrightnessChange(), 1.0, 0.05) << "Brightness changed too much after the expected time of change (control delay too low?).";
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::testExposureGainFromFirstRequestGetsApplied()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto timeSheet = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(5);
> >>>> + auto &ts = *timeSheet;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + ts[0].controls().set(controls::ExposureTime, 10000);
> >>>> + ts[0].controls().set(controls::AnalogueGain, 4.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* We expect it to be applied after 3 frames, the latest*/
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[4].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 10000, 20);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[4].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 4.0, 0.1);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::testExposureGainFromFirstAndSecondRequestGetsApplied()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto timeSheet = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(5);
> >>>> + auto &ts = *timeSheet;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + ts[0].controls().set(controls::ExposureTime, 8000);
> >>>> + ts[0].controls().set(controls::AnalogueGain, 2.0);
> >>>> + ts[1].controls().set(controls::ExposureTime, 10000);
> >>>> + ts[1].controls().set(controls::AnalogueGain, 4.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* We expect it to be applied after 3 frames, the latest*/
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[4].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 10000, 20);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR(ts[4].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 4.0, 0.1);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void PerFrameControls::testExposureGainIsAppliedOnFirstFrame()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + ControlList startValues;
> >>>> + startValues.set(controls::ExposureTime, 5000);
> >>>> + startValues.set(controls::AnalogueGain, 1.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + auto ts1 = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(3, &startValues);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR((*ts1)[0].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 5000, 20);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR((*ts1)[0].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 1.0, 0.01);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* Second capture with different values to ensure we don't hit default/old values */
> >>>> +
> >>>> + startValues.set(controls::ExposureTime, 15000);
> >>>> + startValues.set(controls::AnalogueGain, 4.0);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + auto ts2 = startCaptureWithTimeSheet(3, &startValues);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR((*ts2)[0].metadata().get(controls::ExposureTime).value(), 15000, 20);
> >>>> + EXPECT_NEAR((*ts2)[0].metadata().get(controls::AnalogueGain).value(), 4.0, 0.01);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* with 3x exposure and 4x gain we could expect a brightness increase of 2x */
> >>>> + double brightnessChange = ts2->get(1).getSpotBrightness() / ts1->get(1).getSpotBrightness();
> >>>> + EXPECT_GT(brightnessChange, 2.0);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.h b/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.h
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 00000000..e783f024
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/per_frame_controls.h
> >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
> >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2024, Ideas on Board Oy
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * per_frame_controls.h - Tests for per frame controls
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#pragma once
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <memory>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <libcamera/libcamera.h>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include "../common/event_loop.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include "simple_capture.h"
> >>>> +#include "time_sheet.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +class PerFrameControls : public SimpleCapture
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +public:
> >>>> + PerFrameControls(std::shared_ptr<libcamera::Camera> camera);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + std::shared_ptr<TimeSheet> startCaptureWithTimeSheet(unsigned int framesToCapture, const libcamera::ControlList *controls = nullptr);
> >>>> + void runCaptureSession();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + void testFramePreciseExposureChange();
> >>>> + void testFramePreciseGainChange();
> >>>> + void testExposureGainIsAppliedOnFirstFrame();
> >>>> + void testExposureGainFromFirstRequestGetsApplied();
> >>>> + void testExposureGainFromFirstAndSecondRequestGetsApplied();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + int queueRequest(libcamera::Request *request);
> >>>> + void requestComplete(libcamera::Request *request) override;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + unsigned int queueCount_;
> >>>> + unsigned int captureCount_;
> >>>> + unsigned int captureLimit_;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + std::weak_ptr<TimeSheet> timeSheet_;
> >>>> +};
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.cpp b/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.cpp
> >>>> index cf4d7cf3..56680a83 100644
> >>>> --- a/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.cpp
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.cpp
> >>>> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ void SimpleCapture::configure(StreamRole role)
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> -void SimpleCapture::start()
> >>>> +void SimpleCapture::start(const ControlList *controls)
> >>>> {
> >>>> Stream *stream = config_->at(0).stream();
> >>>> int count = allocator_->allocate(stream);
> >>>> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ void SimpleCapture::start()
> >>>>
> >>>> camera_->requestCompleted.connect(this, &SimpleCapture::requestComplete);
> >>>>
> >>>> - ASSERT_EQ(camera_->start(), 0) << "Failed to start camera";
> >>>> + ASSERT_EQ(camera_->start(controls), 0) << "Failed to start camera";
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> void SimpleCapture::stop()
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.h b/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.h
> >>>> index 2911d601..54b1d54b 100644
> >>>> --- a/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.h
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/simple_capture.h
> >>>> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ protected:
> >>>> SimpleCapture(std::shared_ptr<libcamera::Camera> camera);
> >>>> virtual ~SimpleCapture();
> >>>>
> >>>> - void start();
> >>>> + void start(const libcamera::ControlList *controls = nullptr);
> >>>> void stop();
> >>>>
> >>>> virtual void requestComplete(libcamera::Request *request) = 0;
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.cpp b/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.cpp
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 00000000..9a0e6544
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.cpp
> >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
> >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later */
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2024, Ideas on Board Oy
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * time_sheet.cpp
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +#include "time_sheet.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <sstream>
> >>>> +#include <libcamera/libcamera.h>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include "libcamera/internal/formats.h"
> >>>> +#include "libcamera/internal/mapped_framebuffer.h"
> >>>> +
> >>>> +using namespace libcamera;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +double calcPixelMeanNV12(const uint8_t *data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + return (double)*data;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +double calcPixelMeanRAW10(const uint8_t *data)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + return (double)*((const uint16_t *)data);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +double calculateMeanBrightnessFromCenterSpot(libcamera::Request *request)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + const Request::BufferMap &buffers = request->buffers();
> >>>> + for (const auto &[stream, buffer] : buffers) {
> >>>> + MappedFrameBuffer in(buffer, MappedFrameBuffer::MapFlag::Read);
> >>>> + if (in.isValid()) {
> >>>> + auto data = in.planes()[0].data();
> >>>> + auto streamConfig = stream->configuration();
> >>>> + auto formatInfo = PixelFormatInfo::info(streamConfig.pixelFormat);
> >>>> +
> >>>> + std::function<double(const uint8_t *data)> calcPixelMean;
> >>>> + int pixelStride;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + switch (streamConfig.pixelFormat) {
> >>>> + case formats::NV12:
> >>>> + calcPixelMean = calcPixelMeanNV12;
> >>>> + pixelStride = 1;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + case formats::SRGGB10:
> >>>> + calcPixelMean = calcPixelMeanRAW10;
> >>>> + pixelStride = 2;
> >>>> + break;
> >>>> + default:
> >>>> + std::stringstream s;
> >>>> + s << "Unsupported Pixelformat " << formatInfo.name;
> >>>> + throw std::invalid_argument(s.str());
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + double sum = 0;
> >>>> + int w = 20;
> >>>> + int xs = streamConfig.size.width / 2 - w / 2;
> >>>> + int ys = streamConfig.size.height / 2 - w / 2;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + for (auto y = ys; y < ys + w; y++) {
> >>>> + auto line = data + y * streamConfig.stride;
> >>>> + for (auto x = xs; x < xs + w; x++) {
> >>>> + sum += calcPixelMean(line + x * pixelStride);
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + sum = sum / (w * w);
> >>>> + return sum;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + return 0;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TimeSheetEntry::TimeSheetEntry(const ControlIdMap &idmap)
> >>>> + : controls_(idmap)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void TimeSheetEntry::handleCompleteRequest(libcamera::Request *request, const TimeSheetEntry *previous)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + metadata_ = request->metadata();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + spotBrightness_ = calculateMeanBrightnessFromCenterSpot(request);
> >>>> + if (previous) {
> >>>> + brightnessChange_ = spotBrightness_ / previous->getSpotBrightness();
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + sequence_ = request->sequence();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void TimeSheetEntry::printInfo()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + std::cout << "=== Frame " << sequence_ << std::endl;
> >>>> + std::cout << "Brightness: " << spotBrightness_ << std::endl;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + if (!metadata_.empty()) {
> >>>> + std::cout << "Metadata:" << std::endl;
> >>>> + auto idMap = metadata_.idMap();
> >>>> + assert(idMap);
> >>>> + for (const auto &[id, value] : metadata_) {
> >>>> + std::cout << " " << idMap->at(id)->name() << " : " << value.toString() << std::endl;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +TimeSheetEntry &TimeSheet::get(size_t pos)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + auto &entry = entries_[pos];
> >>>> + if (!entry)
> >>>> + entry = std::make_shared<TimeSheetEntry>(idmap_);
> >>>> + return *entry;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void TimeSheet::prepareForQueue(libcamera::Request *request, uint32_t sequence)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + request->controls() = get(sequence).controls();
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void TimeSheet::handleCompleteRequest(libcamera::Request *request)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + uint32_t sequence = request->sequence();
> >>>> + auto &entry = get(sequence);
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry *previous = nullptr;
> >>>> + if (sequence >= 1) {
> >>>> + previous = entries_[sequence - 1].get();
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + entry.handleCompleteRequest(request, previous);
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +void TimeSheet::printAllInfos()
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + for (auto entry : entries_) {
> >>>> + if (entry)
> >>>> + entry->printInfo();
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +}
> >>>> diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.h b/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.h
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 00000000..c155763c
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/time_sheet.h
> >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
> >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later */
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2024, Ideas on Board Oy
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * time_sheet.h
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#pragma once
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <future>
> >>>> +#include <vector>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#include <libcamera/libcamera.h>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +class TimeSheetEntry
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +public:
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry(const libcamera::ControlIdMap &idmap);
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry(TimeSheetEntry &&other) noexcept = default;
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry(const TimeSheetEntry &) = delete;
> >>>> +
> >>>> + libcamera::ControlList &controls() { return controls_; };
> >>>> + libcamera::ControlList &metadata() { return metadata_; };
> >>>> + void handleCompleteRequest(libcamera::Request *request, const TimeSheetEntry *previous);
> >>>> + void printInfo();
> >>>> + double getSpotBrightness() const { return spotBrightness_; };
> >>>> + double getBrightnessChange() const { return brightnessChange_; };
> >>>> +
> >>>> +private:
> >>>> + double spotBrightness_ = 0.0;
> >>>> + double brightnessChange_ = 0.0;
> >>>> + libcamera::ControlList controls_;
> >>>> + libcamera::ControlList metadata_;
> >>>> + uint32_t sequence_ = 0;
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +class TimeSheet
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +public:
> >>>> + TimeSheet(int count, const libcamera::ControlIdMap &idmap)
> >>>> + : idmap_(idmap), entries_(count){};
> >>>> +
> >>>> + void prepareForQueue(libcamera::Request *request, uint32_t sequence);
> >>>> + void handleCompleteRequest(libcamera::Request *request);
> >>>> + void printAllInfos();
> >>>> +
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry &operator[](size_t pos) { return get(pos); };
> >>>> + TimeSheetEntry &get(size_t pos);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +private:
> >>>> + const libcamera::ControlIdMap &idmap_;
> >>>> + std::vector<std::shared_ptr<TimeSheetEntry>> entries_;
> >>>> +};
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.40.1
> >>>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Stefan Klug
> >>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Stefan Klug
>
More information about the libcamera-devel
mailing list