Over roughly the last year and a half I have been participating as a reviewer in ACM s Computing Reviews, and have even been honored as a Featured Reviewer. Given I have long enjoyed reading friends reviews of their reading material (particularly, hats off to the very active Russ Allbery, who both beats all of my frequency expectations (I could never sustain the rythm he reads to!) and holds documented records for his >20 years as a book reader, with far more clarity and readability than I can aim for!), I decided to explicitly share my reviews via this blog, as the audience is somewhat congruent; I will also link here some reviews that were not approved for publication, clearly marking them so. I will probably work on wrangling my Jekyll site to display an (auto-)updated page and RSS feed for the reviews. In the meantime, the reviews I have published are:

• 2022.06.15 A world without E-mail (Cal Newport)
• 2022.08.08 Can AI learn to forget? (Samuel Greentard)
• 2023.01.10 Learn enough developer tools to be dangerous: Command line, text editor and Git version control essentials (Michael Hartl)
• 2023.01.12 Phishing and communication channels: A guide to identifying and mitigating phishing attacks (Gunikhan Sonowal)
• 2023.03.14 Jerusalem Online: Critical cartography for the digital age (Valentina Carraro)
• 2023.04.25 Language, gender and videogames: Using corpora to analyse the representation of gender in fantasy videogames (Frazer Heritage)
• 2023.06.23 Democratizing domain-specific computing (Chi Y., Qiao W., Sohrabizadeh A., Wang J., Cong J.)
• 2023.09.03 A free press, if you can keep it: What natural language processing reveals about freedom of the press in Hong Kong (Giovanna Maria Dora Dore, Arya D. McCarthy, James A. Scharf)
• 2023.11.08 Humble AI (Brian Knowles, Jason D Cruz, John T. Richards, Kush R. Varshney)
• 2023.11.21 The stuff games are made of (Pippin Barr)

Review: The Box, by Marc Levinson

Publisher:	Princeton University Press
Copyright:	2006, 2008
Printing:	2008
ISBN:	0-691-13640-8
Format:	Trade paperback
Pages:	278

The shipping container as we know it is only about 65 years old. Shipping things in containers is obviously much older; we've been doing that for longer than we've had ships. But the standardized metal box, set on a rail car or loaded with hundreds of its indistinguishable siblings into an enormous, specially-designed cargo ship, became economically significant only recently. Today it is one of the oft-overlooked foundations of global supply chains. The startlingly low cost of container shipping is part of why so much of what US consumers buy comes from Asia, and why most complex machinery is assembled in multiple countries from parts gathered from a dizzying variety of sources. Marc Levinson's The Box is a history of container shipping, from its (arguable) beginnings in the trailer bodies loaded on Pan-Atlantic Steamship Corporation's Ideal-X in 1956 to just-in-time international supply chains in the 2000s. It's a popular history that falls on the academic side, with a full index and 60 pages of citations and other notes. (Per my normal convention, those pages aren't included in the sidebar page count.) The Box is organized mostly chronologically, but Levinson takes extended detours into labor relations and container standardization at the appropriate points in the timeline. The book is very US-centric. Asian, European, and Australian shipping is discussed mostly in relation to trade with the US, and Africa is barely mentioned. I don't have the background to know whether this is historically correct for container shipping or is an artifact of Levinson's focus. Many single-item popular histories focus on something that involves obvious technological innovation (paint pigments) or deep cultural resonance (salt) or at least entertaining quirkiness (punctuation marks, resignation letters). Shipping containers are important but simple and boring. The least interesting chapter in The Box covers container standardization, in which a whole bunch of people had boring meetings, wrote some things done, discovered many of the things they wrote down were dumb, wrote more things down, met with different people to have more meetings, published a standard that partly reflected the fixations of that one guy who is always involved in standards discussions, and then saw that standard be promptly ignored by the major market players. You may be wondering if that describes the whole book. It doesn't, but not because of the shipping containers. The Box is interesting because the process of economic change is interesting, and container shipping is almost entirely about business processes rather than technology. Levinson starts the substance of the book with a description of shipping before standardized containers. This was the most effective, and probably the most informative, chapter. Beyond some vague ideas picked up via cultural osmosis, I had no idea how cargo shipping worked. Levinson gives the reader a memorable feel for the sheer amount of physical labor involved in loading and unloading a ship with mixed cargo (what's called "breakbulk" cargo to distinguish it from bulk cargo like coal or wheat that fills an entire hold). It's not just the effort of hauling barrels, bales, or boxes with cranes or raw muscle power, although that is significant. It's also the need to touch every piece of cargo to move it, inventory it, warehouse it, and then load it on a truck or train. The idea of container shipping is widely attributed, including by Levinson, to Malcom McLean, a trucking magnate who became obsessed with the idea of what we now call intermodal transport: using the same container for goods on ships, railroads, and trucks so that the contents don't have to be unpacked and repacked at each transfer point. Levinson uses his career as an anchor for the story, from his acquisition of Pan-American Steamship Corporation to pursue his original idea (backed by private equity and debt, in a very modern twist), through his years running Sea-Land as the first successful major container shipper, and culminating in his disastrous attempted return to shipping by acquiring United States Lines. I am dubious of Great Man narratives in history books, and I think Levinson may be overselling McLean's role. Container shipping was an obvious idea that the industry had been talking about for decades. Even Levinson admits that, despite a few gestures at giving McLean central credit. Everyone involved in shipping understood that cargo handling was the most expensive and time-consuming part, and that if one could minimize cargo handling at the docks by loading and unloading full containers that didn't have to be opened, shipping costs would be much lower (and profits higher). The idea wasn't the hard part. McLean was the first person to pull it off at scale, thanks to some audacious economic risks and a willingness to throw sharp elbows and play politics, but it seems likely that someone else would have played that role if McLean hadn't existed. Container shipping didn't happen earlier because achieving that cost savings required a huge expenditure of capital and a major disruption of a transportation industry that wasn't interested in being disrupted. The ships had to be remodeled and eventually replaced; manufacturing had to change; railroad and trucking in theory had to change (in practice, intermodal transport; McLean's obsession, didn't happen at scale until much later); pricing had to be entirely reworked; logistical tracking of goods had to be done much differently; and significant amounts of extremely expensive equipment to load and unload heavy containers had to be designed, built, and installed. McLean's efforts proved the cost savings was real and compelling, but it still took two decades before the shipping industry reconstructed itself around containers. That interim period is where this history becomes a labor story, and that's where Levinson's biases become somewhat distracting. In the United States, loading and unloading of cargo ships was done by unionized longshoremen through a bizarre but complex and long-standing system of contract hiring. The cost savings of container shipping comes almost completely from the loss of work for longshoremen. It's a classic replacement of labor with capital; the work done by gangs of twenty or more longshoreman is instead done by a single crane operator at much higher speed and efficiency. The longshoreman unions therefore opposed containerization and launched numerous strikes and other labor actions to delay use of containers, force continued hiring that containers made unnecessary, or win buyouts and payoffs for current longshoremen. Levinson is trying to write a neutral history and occasionally shows some sympathy for longshoremen, but they still get the Luddite treatment in this book: the doomed reactionaries holding back progress. Longshoremen had a vigorous and powerful union that won better working conditions structured in ways that look absurd to outsiders, such as requiring that ships hire twice as many men as necessary so that half of them could get paid while not working. The unions also had a reputation for corruption that Levinson stresses constantly, and theft of breakbulk cargo during loading and warehousing was common. One of the interesting selling points for containers was that lossage from theft during shipping apparently decreased dramatically. It's obvious that the surface demand of the longshoremen unions, that either containers not be used or that just as many manual laborers be hired for container shipping as for earlier breakbulk shipping, was impossible, and that the profession as it existed in the 1950s was doomed. But beneath those facts, and the smoke screen of Levinson's obvious distaste for their unions, is a real question about what society owes workers whose jobs are eliminated by major shifts in business practices. That question of fairness becomes more pointed when one realizes that this shift was massively subsidized by US federal and local governments. McLean's Sea-Land benefited from direct government funding and subsidized navy surplus ships, massive port construction in New Jersey with public funds, and a sweetheart logistics contract from the US military to supply troops fighting the Vietnam War that was so generous that the return voyage was free and every container Sea-Land picked up from Japanese ports was pure profit. The US shipping industry was heavily government-supported, particularly in the early days when the labor conflicts were starting. Levinson notes all of this, but never draws the contrast between the massive support for shipping corporations and the complete lack of formal support for longshoremen. There are hard ethical questions about what society owes displaced workers even in a pure capitalist industry transformation, and this was very far from pure capitalism. The US government bankrolled large parts of the growth of container shipping, but the only way that longshoremen could get part of that money was through strikes to force payouts from private shipping companies. There are interesting questions of social and ethical history here that would require careful disentangling of the tendency of any group to oppose disruptive change and fairness questions of who gets government support and who doesn't. They will have to wait for another book; Levinson never mentions them. There were some things about this book that annoyed me, but overall it's a solid work of popular history and deserves its fame. Levinson's account is easy to follow, specific without being tedious, and backed by voluminous notes. It's not the most compelling story on its own merits; you have to have some interest in logistics and economics to justify reading the entire saga. But it's the sort of history that gives one a sense of the fractal complexity of any area of human endeavor, and I usually find those worth reading. Recommended if you like this sort of thing. Rating: 7 out of 10

This is a post I wrote in June 2022, but did not publish back then. After first publishing it in December 2023, a perfectionist insecure part of me unpublished it again. After receiving positive feedback, i slightly amended and republish it now. In this post, I talk about unpaid work in F/LOSS, taking on the example of hackathons, and why, in my opinion, the expectation of volunteer work is hurting diversity. Disclaimer: I don t have all the answers, only some ideas and questions.

Previous findings In 2006, the Flosspols survey searched to explain the role of gender in free/libre/open source software (F/LOSS) communities because an earlier [study] revealed a significant discrepancy in the proportion of men to women. It showed that just about 1.5% of F/LOSS community members were female at that time, compared with 28% in proprietary software (which is also a low number). Their key findings were, to name just a few:

• that F/LOSS rewards the producing code rather than the producing software. It thereby puts most emphasis on a particular skill set. Other activities such as interface design or documentation are understood as less technical and therefore less prestigious.
• The reliance on long hours of intensive computing in writing successful code means that men, who in general assume that time outside of waged labour is theirs , are freer to participate than women, who normally still assume a disproportionate amount of domestic responsibilities. Female F/LOSS participants, however, seem to be able to allocate a disproportionate larger share of their leisure time for their F/LOSS activities. This gives an indication that women who are not able to spend as much time on voluntary activities have difficulties to integrate into the community.

We also know from the 2016 Debian survey, published in 2021, that a majority of Debian contributors are employed, rather than being contractors, and rather than being students. Also, 95.5% of respondents to that study were men between the ages of 30 and 49, highly educated, with the largest groups coming from Germany, France, USA, and the UK. The study found that only 20% of the respondents were being paid to work on Debian. Half of these 20% estimate that the amount of work on Debian they are being paid for corresponds to less than 20% of the work they do there. On the other side, there are 14% of those who are being paid for Debian work who declared that 80-100% of the work they do in Debian is remunerated.

So, if a majority of people is not paid, why do they work on F/LOSS? Or: What are the incentives of free software? In 2021, Louis-Philippe V ronneau aka Pollo, who is not only a Debian Developer but also an economist, published his thesis What are the incentive structures of free software (The actual thesis was written in French). One very interesting finding Pollo pointed out is this one:

Indeed, while we have proven that there is a strong and significative correlation between the income and the participation in a free/libre software project, it is not possible for us to pronounce ourselves about the causality of this link.

In the French original text:

En effet, si nous avons prouv qu il existe une corr lation forte et significative entre le salaire et la participation un projet libre, il ne nous est pas possible de nous prononcer sur la causalit de ce lien.

Said differently, it is certain that there is a relationship between income and F/LOSS contribution, but it s unclear whether working on free/libre software ultimately helps finding a well paid job, or if having a well paid job is the cause enabling work on free/libre software. I would like to scratch this question a bit further, mostly relying on my own observations, experiences, and discussions with F/LOSS contributors.

Volunteer work is unpaid work We often hear of hackathons, hack weeks, or hackfests. I ve been at some such events myself, Tails organized one, the IETF regularly organizes hackathons, and last week (June 2022!) I saw an invitation for a hack week with the Torproject. This type of event generally last several days. While the people who organize these events are being paid by the organizations they work for, participants on the other hand are generally joining on a volunteer basis. Who can we expect to show up at this type of event under these circumstances as participants? To answer this question, I collected some ideas:

• people who have an employer sponsoring their work
• people who have a funder/grant sponsoring their work
• people who have a high income and can take time off easily (in that regard, remember the Gender Pay Gap, women often earn less for the same work than men)
• people who rely on family wealth (living off an inheritance, living on rights payments from a famous grandparent - I m not making these situations up, there are actual people in such financially favorable situations )
• people who don t need much money because they don t have to pay rent or pay low rent (besides house owners that category includes people who live in squats or have social welfare paying for their rent, people who live with parents or caretakers)
• people who don t need to do care work (for children, elderly family members, pets. Remember that most care work is still done by women.)
• students who have financial support or are in a situation in which they do not yet need to generate a lot of income
• people who otherwise have free time at their disposal

So, who, in your opinion, fits these unwritten requirements? Looking at this list, it s pretty clear to me why we d mostly find white men from the Global North, generally with higher education in hackathons and F/LOSS development. ( Great, they re a culture fit! ) Yes, there will also always be some people of marginalized groups who will attend such events because they expect to network, to find an internship, to find a better job in the future, or to add their participation to their curriculum. To me, this rings a bunch of alarm bells.

Low diversity in F/LOSS projects a mirror of the distribution of wealth I believe that the lack of diversity in F/LOSS is first of all a mirror of the distribution of wealth on a larger level. And by wealth I m referring to financial wealth as much as to social wealth in the sense of Bourdieu: Families of highly educated parents socially reproducing privilege by allowing their kids to attend better schools, supporting and guiding them in their choices of study and work, providing them with relations to internships acting as springboards into well paid jobs and so on. That said, we should ask ourselves as well:

Do F/LOSS projects exacerbate existing lines of oppression by relying on unpaid work? Let s look again at the causality question of Pollo s research (in my words):

It is unclear whether working on free/libre software ultimately helps finding a well paid job, or if having a well paid job is the cause enabling work on free/libre software.

Maybe we need to imagine this cause-effect relationship over time: as a student, without children and lots of free time, hopefully some money from the state or the family, people can spend time on F/LOSS, collect experience, earn recognition - and later find a well-paid job and make unpaid F/LOSS contributions into a hobby, cementing their status in the community, while at the same time generating a sense of well-being from working on the common good. This is a quite common scenario. As the Flosspols study revealed however, boys often get their own computer at the age of 14, while girls get one only at the age of 20. (These numbers might be slightly different now, and possibly many people don t own an actual laptop or desktop computer anymore, instead they own mobile devices which are not exactly inciting them to look behind the surface, take apart, learn, appropriate technology.) In any case, the above scenario does not allow for people who join F/LOSS later in life, eg. changing careers, to find their place. I believe that F/LOSS projects cannot expect to have more women, people of color, people from working class backgrounds, people from outside of Germany, France, USA, UK, Australia, and Canada on board as long as volunteer work is the status quo and waged labour an earned privilege.

Wait, are you criticizing all these wonderful people who sacrifice their free time to work towards common good? No, that s definitely not my intention, I m glad that F/LOSS exists, and the F/LOSS ecosystem has always represented a small utopia to me that is worth cherishing and nurturing. However, I think we still need to talk more about the lack of diversity, and investigate it further.

Paid internships are one key to countering lines of oppression Lots of projects, even Outreachy and GSoC, require one contribution to F/LOSS to be made prior to be able to apply for a paid internship. I do well understand the incentive of this, but it s quite a high entry barrier. In 2014/2015 I was able to have 3 months of work on Debian paid for via an Outreachy internship. I was extremely grateful for that opportunity because without this paid internship I would never have found the time to engage with the Debian and F/LOSS ecosystem in depth simply because I would have had to work on my usual day job; I have rent to pay, and a health insurance which is really not cheap. These programs are key because they help counter existing lines of oppression at a strategic point: they buy someone s time by providing them a small income. Back then, the internship was paid 5,500USD gross for 3 months, meaning after taxes and paying social/health insurance, I was left with roughly 1100 per month, really not much money for living decently in Western Europe, but enough to get started. By the way, to my knowledge, 4 women who did an Outreachy internship subsequently became Debian Developers. 3 other female Debian Developers are or were part of Outreachy on the organizer side. I think this shows that this program is a success that we don t celebrate enough!

Some types of work are never being paid Besides free work at hacking events, let me also underline that a lot of work in F/LOSS is not considered payable work (yes, that s an oxymoron!). Which F/LOSS project for example, has ever paid translators a decent fee? Which project has ever considered that doing the social glue work, often done by women in the projects, is work that should be paid for? Which F/LOSS projects pay the people who do their Debian packaging rather than relying on yet another already well-paid white man who can afford doing this work for free all the while holding up how great the F/LOSS ecosystem is? And how many people on opensourcedesign jobs are looking to get their logo or website done for free? (Isn t that heart icon appealing to your altruistic empathy?) In my experience even F/LOSS projects which are trying to do the right thing by paying everyone the same amount of money per hour run into issues when it turns out that not all hours are equal and that some types of work do not qualify for remuneration at all or that the rules for the clocking of work are not universally applied in the same way by everyone.

Not every interaction should have a monetary value, but Some of you want to keep working without being paid, because that feels a bit like communism within capitalism, it makes you feel good to contribute to the greater good while not having the system determine your value over money. I hear you. I ve been there (and sometimes still am). But as long as we live in this system, even though we didn t choose to and maybe even despise it - communism is not about working for free, it s about getting paid equally and adequately. We may not think about it while under the age of 40 or 45, but working without adequate financial compensation, even half of the time, will ultimately result in not being able to care for oneself when sick, when old. And while this may not be an issue for people who inherit wealth, or have an otherwise safe economical background, eg. an academic salary, it is a huge problem and barrier for many people coming out of the working or service classes. (Oh and please, don t repeat the neoliberal lie that everyone can achieve whatever they aim for, if they just tried hard enough. French research shows that (in France) one has only 30% chance to become a class defector , and change social class upwards. But I managed to get out and move up, so everyone can! - well, if you believe that I m afraid you might be experiencing survivor bias.)

Not all bodies are equally able We should also be aware that not all of us can work with the same amount of energy either. There is yet another category of people who are excluded by the expectation of volunteer work, either because the waged labour they do already eats all of their energy, or because their bodies are not disposed to do that much work, for example because of mental health issues - such as depression-, or because of physical disabilities.

When organizing events relying on volunteer work please think about these things. Yes, you can tell people that they should ask their employer to pay them for attending a hackathon - but, as I ve hopefully shown, that would not do it for many people, especially newcomers. Instead, you could propose a fund to make it possible that people who would not normally attend can attend. DebConf is a good example for having done this for many years.

Conclusively I would like to urge free software projects that have a budget and directly pay some people from it to map where they rely on volunteer work and how this hurts diversity in their project. How do you or your project exacerbate pre-existing lines of oppression by granting or not granting monetary value to certain types of work? What is it that you take for granted? As always, I m curious about your feedback!

Worth a read These ideas are far from being new. Ashe Dryden s well-researched post The ethics of unpaid labor and the OSS community dates back to 2013 and is as important as it was ten years ago.

Last week marked a major milestone for me: the AMD driver-specific color management properties reached the upstream linux-next! And to celebrate, I m happy to share the slides notes from my 2023 XDC talk, The Rainbow Treasure Map along with the individual recording that just dropped last week on youtube talk about happy coincidences!

Steam Deck Rainbow: Treasure Map & Magic Frogs While I may be bubbly and chatty in everyday life, the stage isn t exactly my comfort zone (hallway talks are more my speed). But the journey of developing the AMD color management properties was so full of discoveries that I simply had to share the experience. Witnessing the fantastic work of Jeremy and Joshua bring it all to life on the Steam Deck OLED was like uncovering magical ingredients and whipping up something truly enchanting. For XDC 2023, we split our Rainbow journey into two talks. My focus, The Rainbow Treasure Map, explored the new color features we added to the Linux kernel driver, diving deep into the hardware capabilities of AMD/Steam Deck. Joshua then followed with The Rainbow Frogs and showed the breathtaking color magic released on Gamescope thanks to the power unlocked by the kernel driver s Steam Deck color properties.

Packing a Rainbow into 15 Minutes I had so much to tell, but a half-slot talk meant crafting a concise presentation. To squeeze everything into 15 minutes (and calm my pre-talk jitters a bit!), I drafted and practiced those slides and notes countless times. So grab your map, and let s embark on the Rainbow journey together! Intro: Hi, I m Melissa from Igalia and welcome to the Rainbow Treasure Map, a talk about advanced color management on Linux with AMD/SteamDeck. Useful links: First of all, if you are not used to the topic, you may find these links useful.

1. XDC 2022 - I m not an AMD expert, but - Melissa Wen
2. XDC 2022 - Is HDR Harder? - Harry Wentland
3. XDC 2022 Lightning - HDR Workshop Summary - Harry Wentland
4. Color management and HDR documentation for FOSS graphics - Pekka Paalanen et al.
5. Cinematic Color - 2012 SIGGRAPH course notes - Jeremy Selan
6. AMD Driver-specific Properties for Color Management on Linux (Part 1) - Melissa Wen

Context: When we talk about colors in the graphics chain, we should keep in mind that we have a wide variety of source content colorimetry, a variety of output display devices and also the internal processing. Users expect consistent color reproduction across all these devices. The userspace can use GPU-accelerated color management to get it. But this also requires an interface with display kernel drivers that is currently missing from the DRM/KMS framework. Since April, I ve been bothering the DRM community by sending patchsets from the work of me and Joshua to add driver-specific color properties to the AMD display driver. In parallel, discussions on defining a generic color management interface are still ongoing in the community. Moreover, we are still not clear about the diversity of color capabilities among hardware vendors. To bridge this gap, we defined a color pipeline for Gamescope that fits the latest versions of AMD hardware. It delivers advanced color management features for gamut mapping, HDR rendering, SDR on HDR, and HDR on SDR. AMD/Steam Deck hardware: AMD frequently releases new GPU and APU generations. Each generation comes with a DCN version with display hardware improvements. Therefore, keep in mind that this work uses the AMD Steam Deck hardware and its kernel driver. The Steam Deck is an APU with a DCN3.01 display driver, a DCN3 family. It s important to have this information since newer AMD DCN drivers inherit implementations from previous families but aldo each generation of AMD hardware may introduce new color capabilities. Therefore I recommend you to familiarize yourself with the hardware you are working on. The AMD display driver in the kernel space: It consists of three layers, (1) the DRM/KMS framework, (2) the AMD Display Manager, and (3) the AMD Display Core. We extended the color interface exposed to userspace by leveraging existing DRM resources and connecting them using driver-specific functions for color property management. Bridging DC color capabilities and the DRM API required significant changes in the color management of AMD Display Manager - the Linux-dependent part that connects the AMD DC interface to the DRM/KMS framework. The AMD DC is the OS-agnostic layer. Its code is shared between platforms and DCN versions. Examining this part helps us understand the AMD color pipeline and hardware capabilities, since the machinery for hardware settings and resource management are already there. The newest architecture for AMD display hardware is the AMD Display Core Next. In this architecture, two blocks have the capability to manage colors:

• Display Pipe and Plane (DPP) - for pre-blending adjustments;
• Multiple Pipe/Plane Combined (MPC) - for post-blending color transformations.

Let s see what we have in the DRM API for pre-blending color management. DRM plane color properties: This is the DRM color management API before blending. Nothing! Except two basic DRM plane properties: color_encoding and color_range for the input colorspace conversion, that is not covered by this work. In case you re not familiar with AMD shared code, what we need to do is basically draw a map and navigate there! We have some DRM color properties after blending, but nothing before blending yet. But much of the hardware programming was already implemented in the AMD DC layer, thanks to the shared code. Still both the DRM interface and its connection to the shared code were missing. That s when the search begins! AMD driver-specific color pipeline: Looking at the color capabilities of the hardware, we arrive at this initial set of properties. The path wasn t exactly like that. We had many iterations and discoveries until reached to this pipeline. The Plane Degamma is our first driver-specific property before blending. It s used to linearize the color space from encoded values to light linear values. We can use a pre-defined transfer function or a user lookup table (in short, LUT) to linearize the color space. Pre-defined transfer functions for plane degamma are hardcoded curves that go to a specific hardware block called DPP Degamma ROM. It supports the following transfer functions: sRGB EOTF, BT.709 inverse OETF, PQ EOTF, and pure power curves Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4 and Gamma 2.6. We also have a one-dimensional LUT. This 1D LUT has four thousand ninety six (4096) entries, the usual 1D LUT size in the DRM/KMS. It s an array of drm_color_lut that goes to the DPP Gamma Correction block. We also have now a color transformation matrix (CTM) for color space conversion. It s a 3x4 matrix of fixed points that goes to the DPP Gamut Remap Block. Both pre- and post-blending matrices were previously gone to the same color block. We worked on detaching them to clear both paths. Now each CTM goes on its own way. Next, the HDR Multiplier. HDR Multiplier is a factor applied to the color values of an image to increase their overall brightness. This is useful for converting images from a standard dynamic range (SDR) to a high dynamic range (HDR). As it can range beyond [0.0, 1.0] subsequent transforms need to use the PQ(HDR) transfer functions. And we need a 3D LUT. But 3D LUT has a limited number of entries in each dimension, so we want to use it in a colorspace that is optimized for human vision. It means in a non-linear space. To deliver it, userspace may need one 1D LUT before 3D LUT to delinearize content and another one after to linearize content again for blending. The pre-3D-LUT curve is called Shaper curve. Unlike Degamma TF, there are no hardcoded curves for shaper TF, but we can use the AMD color module in the driver to build the following shaper curves from pre-defined coefficients. The color module combines the TF and the user LUT values into the LUT that goes to the DPP Shaper RAM block. Finally, our rockstar, the 3D LUT. 3D LUT is perfect for complex color transformations and adjustments between color channels. 3D LUT is also more complex to manage and requires more computational resources, as a consequence, its number of entries is usually limited. To overcome this restriction, the array contains samples from the approximated function and values between samples are estimated by tetrahedral interpolation. AMD supports 17 and 9 as the size of a single-dimension. Blue is the outermost dimension, red the innermost. As mentioned, we need a post-3D-LUT curve to linearize the color space before blending. This is done by Blend TF and LUT. Similar to shaper TF, there are no hardcoded curves for Blend TF. The pre-defined curves are the same as the Degamma block, but calculated by the color module. The resulting LUT goes to the DPP Blend RAM block. Now we have everything connected before blending. As a conflict between plane and CRTC Degamma was inevitable, our approach doesn t accept that both are set at the same time. We also optimized the conversion of the framebuffer to wire encoding by adding support to pre-defined CRTC Gamma TF. Again, there are no hardcoded curves and TF and LUT are combined by the AMD color module. The same types of shaper curves are supported. The resulting LUT goes to the MPC Gamma RAM block. Finally, we arrived in the final version of DRM/AMD driver-specific color management pipeline. With this knowledge, you re ready to better enjoy the rainbow treasure of AMD display hardware and the world of graphics computing. With this work, Gamescope/Steam Deck embraces the color capabilities of the AMD GPU. We highlight here how we map the Gamescope color pipeline to each AMD color block. Future works: The search for the rainbow treasure is not over! The Linux DRM subsystem contains many hidden treasures from different vendors. We want more complex color transformations and adjustments available on Linux. We also want to expose all GPU color capabilities from all hardware vendors to the Linux userspace. Thanks Joshua and Harry for this joint work and the Linux DRI community for all feedback and reviews. The amazing part of this work comes in the next talk with Joshua and The Rainbow Frogs! Any questions?

---

References:

1. Slides of the talk The Rainbow Treasure Map.
2. Youtube video of the talk The Rainbow Treasure Map.
3. Patch series for AMD driver-specific color management properties (upstream Linux 6.8v).
4. SteamDeck/Gamescope color management pipeline
5. XDC 2023 website.
6. Igalia website.

I was looking over the list of live music I'd seen this year and realised that avante-garde composer William Basinski was actually last year and I had forgotten to write about it! In November 2022, Basinski headlined a night of performances which otherwise featured folk from the venue's "Arists in Residence" programme, with some affiliation to Newcastle's DIY music scene. Unfortunately we arrived too late to catch any of the other acts: partly because of the venue's sometimes doggiest insistence that people can only enter or leave the halls during intervals, and partly because the building works surrounding it had made the southern entrance effectively closed, so we had to walk to the north side of the building to get in¹. Basinski was performing work from Lamentations. Basinski himself presented very unexpectedly to how I imagined him: he's got the Texas drawl, mediated through a fair amount of time spent in New York; very camp, in a glittery top; he kicked off the gig complaining about how tired he was, before a mini rant about the state of the world, riffing on a title from the album: Please, This Shit Has Got To Stop. We were in Hall 1, the larger of the two, and it was sparsely attended; a few people walked out mid performance. My gig-buddy Rob (a useful barometer for me on how things have gone) remarked that it was one of the most unique and unusual gigs he'd been to. I recognised snatches of the tracks from the album, but I'm hard-placed to name or sequence them, and they flowed into each other. I don't know how much of what we were hearing was "live" or what, if anything, was being decided during the performance, but Basinski's set-up included what looked like archaic tape equipment, with exposed loops of tape running between spools that could be interfered with by other tools. The encore was a unique, unreleased mix of Melancholia (II), which (making no apologies) Basinski hit play on before retiring backstage. I didn't take any photos. From memory, I think the venue had specifically stated filming or photos were not allowed for this performance. People at prior shows in New York and London filmed some of their shows; which were substantially similar: I've included embeds of them above. Lots of Basinski's work is on Bandcamp; the three pieces I particularly enjoy are Lamentations, Lamentations by William Basinski On Time Out of Time, On Time Out of Time by William Basinski and his best-known work, The Disintegration Loops. The Disintegration Loops by William Basinski

I have accidentally rewritten screentest, an old X11/GTK2 program that I was previously using to, well, test screens.

Screentest is dead It was removed from Debian in May 2023 but had already missed two releases (Debian 11 "bullseye" and 12 "bookworm") due to release critical bugs. The stated reason for removal was:

The package is orphaned and its upstream is no longer developed. It depends on gtk2, has a low popcon and no reverse dependencies.

So I had little hope to see this program back in Debian. The git repository shows little activity, the last being two years ago. Interestingly, I do not quite remember what it was testing, but I do remember it to find dead pixels, confirm native resolution, and various pixel-peeping. Here's a screenshot of one of the screentest screens: Now, I think it's safe to assume this program is dead and buried, and anyways I'm running wayland now, surely there's something better? Well, no. Of course not. Someone would know about it and tell me before I go on a random coding spree in a fit of procrastination... riiight? At least, the Debconf video team didn't seem to know of any replacement. They actually suggested I just "invoke gstreamer directly" and "embrace the joy of shell scripting".

Screentest reborn So, I naively did exactly that and wrote a horrible shell script. Then I realized the next step was to write an command line parser and monitor geometry guessing, and thought "NOPE, THIS IS WHERE THE SHELL STOPS", and rewrote the whole thing in Python. Now, screentest lives as a ~400-line Python script, half of which is unit test data and command-line parsing.

Why screentest Some smarty pants is going to complain and ask why the heck one would need something like that (and, well, someone already did), so maybe I can lay down a list of use case:

• testing color output, in broad terms (answering the question of "is it just me or this project really yellow?")
• testing focus and keystone ("this looks blurry, can you find a nice sharp frame in that movie to adjust focus?")
• test for native resolution and sharpness ("does this projector really support 4k for 30$? that sounds like bullcrap")
• looking for dead pixels ("i have a new monitor, i hope it's intact")

What does screentest do? Screentest displays a series of "patterns" on screen. The list of patterns is actually hardcoded in the script, copy-pasted from this list from the videotestsrc gstreamer plugin, but you can pass any pattern supported by your gstreamer installation with --patterns. A list of patterns relevant to your installation is available with the gst-inspect-1.0 videotestsrc command. By default, screentest goes through all patterns. Each pattern runs indefinitely until the you close the window, then the next pattern starts. You can restrict to a subset of patterns, for example this would be a good test for dead pixels:

screentest --patterns black,white,red,green,blue

This would be a good sharpness test:

screentest --patterns pinwheel,spokes,checkers-1,checkers-2,checkers-4,checkers-8

A good generic test is the classic SMPTE color bars and is the first in the list, but you can run only that test with:

screentest --patterns smpte

(I will mention, by the way, that as a system administrator with decades of experience, it is nearly impossible to type SMPTE without first typing SMTP and re-typing it again a few times before I get it right. I fully expect this post to have numerous typos.)

Here's an example of the SMPTE pattern from Wikipedia: For multi-monitor setups, screentest also supports specifying which output to use as a native resolution, with --output. Failing that, it will try to look at the outputs and use the first it will find. If it fails to find anything, you can specify a resolution with --resolution WIDTHxHEIGHT. I have tried to make it go full screen by default, but stumbled a bug in Sway that crashes gst-launch. If your Wayland compositor supports it, you can possibly enable full screen with --sink waylandsink fullscreen=true. Otherwise it will create a new window that you will have to make fullscreen yourself. For completeness, there's also an --audio flag that will emit the classic "drone", a sine wave at 440Hz at 40% volume (the audiotestsrc gstreamer plugin. And there's a --overlay-name option to show the pattern name, in case you get lost and want to start with one of them again.

How this works Most of the work is done by gstreamer. The script merely generates a pipeline and calls gst-launch to show the output. That both limits what it can do but also makes it much easier to use than figuring out gst-launch. There might be some additional patterns that could be useful, but I think those are better left to gstreamer. I, for example, am somewhat nostalgic of the Philips circle pattern that used to play for TV stations that were off-air in my area. But that, in my opinion, would be better added to the gstreamer plugin than into a separate thing. The script shows which command is being ran, so it's a good introduction to gstreamer pipelines. Advanced users (and the video team) will possibly not need screentest and will design their own pipelines with their own tools. I've previously worked with ffmpeg pipelines (in another such procrastinated coding spree, video-proxy-magic), and I found gstreamer more intuitive, even though it might be slightly less powerful. In retrospect, I should probably have picked a new name, to avoid crashing the namespace already used by the project, which is now on GitHub. Who knows, it might come back to life after this blog post; it would not be the first time. For now, the project lives along side the rest of my scripts collection but if there's sufficient interest, I might move it to its own git repositories. Comments, feedback, contributions are as usual welcome. And naturally, if you know something better for this kind of stuff, I'm happy to learn more about your favorite tool! So now I have finally found something to test my projector, which will likely confirm what I've already known all along: that it's kind of a piece of crap and I need to get a proper one.

Like each month, have a look at the work funded by Freexian s Debian LTS offering. Some notable fixes which were made in LTS during the month of November include the gnutls28 cryptographic library and the freerdp2 Remote Desktop Protocol client/server implementation. The gnutls28 update was prepared by LTS contributor Markus Koschany and dealt with a timing attack which could be used to compromise a cryptographic system, while the freerdp2 update was prepared by LTS contributor Tobias Frost and is the result of work spanning 3 months to deal with dozens of vulnerabilities. In addition to the many ordinary LTS tasks which were completed (CVE triage, patch backports, package updates, etc), there were several contributions by LTS contributors for the benefit of Debian stable and old-stable releases, as well as for the benefit of upstream projects. LTS contributor Abhijith PA uploaded an update of the puma package to unstable in order to fix a vulnerability in that package while LTS contributor Thosten Alteholz sponsored an upload to unstable of libde265 and himself made corresponding uploads of libde265 to Debian stable and old-stable. LTS contributor Bastien Roucari s developed patches for vulnerabilities in zbar and audiofile which were then provided to the respective upstream projects. Updates to packages in Debian stable were made by Markus Koschany to deal with security vulnerabilities and by Chris Lamb to deal with some non-security bugs. As always, the LTS strives to provide high quality updates to packages under the direct purview of the LTS team while also rendering assistance to maintainers, the stable security team, and upstream developers whenever practical.

Debian LTS contributors In November, 18 contributors have been paid to work on Debian LTS, their reports are available:

• Abhijith PA did 7.0h (out of 0h assigned and 14.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 7.0h to the next month.
• Adrian Bunk did 15.0h (out of 14.0h assigned and 9.75h from previous period), thus carrying over 8.75h to the next month.
• Anton Gladky did 10.0h (out of 9.5h assigned and 5.5h from previous period), thus carrying over 5.0h to the next month.
• Bastien Roucari s did 16.0h (out of 18.25h assigned and 1.75h from previous period), thus carrying over 4.0h to the next month.
• Ben Hutchings did 12.0h (out of 16.5h assigned and 12.25h from previous period), thus carrying over 16.75h to the next month.
• Chris Lamb did 18.0h (out of 17.25h assigned and 0.75h from previous period).
• Emilio Pozuelo Monfort did 15.5h (out of 23.5h assigned and 0.25h from previous period), thus carrying over 8.25h to the next month.
• Guilhem Moulin did 13.0h (out of 12.0h assigned and 8.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 7.0h to the next month.
• Lee Garrett did 14.5h (out of 16.75h assigned and 7.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 9.25h to the next month.
• Markus Koschany did 30.0h (out of 30.0h assigned).
• Ola Lundqvist did 6.5h (out of 8.25h assigned and 15.5h from previous period), thus carrying over 17.25h to the next month.
• Roberto C. S nchez did 5.5h (out of 12.0h assigned), thus carrying over 6.5h to the next month.
• Santiago Ruano Rinc n did 3.25h (out of 13.62h assigned and 2.375h from previous period), thus carrying over 12.745h to the next month.
• Sean Whitton did 3.25h (out of 10.0h assigned), thus carrying over 6.75h to the next month.
• Sylvain Beucler did 10.0h (out of 13.5h assigned and 10.25h from previous period), thus carrying over 13.75h to the next month.
• Thorsten Alteholz did 14.0h (out of 14.0h assigned).
• Tobias Frost did 12.0h (out of 12.0h assigned).
• Utkarsh Gupta did 0.0h (out of 6.0h assigned and 17.75h from previous period), thus carrying over 23.75h to the next month.

Evolution of the situation In November, we have released 35 DLAs.

Thanks to our sponsors Sponsors that joined recently are in bold.

• Platinum sponsors:
  • TOSHIBA (for 99 months)
  • Civil Infrastructure Platform (CIP) (for 67 months)
• Gold sponsors:
  • Roche Diagnostics International AG (for 110 months)
  • Linode (for 104 months)
  • Babiel GmbH (for 93 months)
  • Plat Home (for 93 months)
  • University of Oxford (for 49 months)
  • Deveryware (for 36 months)
  • VyOS Inc (for 31 months)
  • EDF SA (for 20 months)
• Silver sponsors:
  • Domeneshop AS (for 114 months)
  • Nantes M tropole (for 108 months)
  • Univention GmbH (for 100 months)
  • Universit Jean Monnet de St Etienne (for 100 months)
  • Ribbon Communications, Inc. (for 94 months)
  • Exonet B.V. (for 84 months)
  • Leibniz Rechenzentrum (for 78 months)
  • CINECA (for 67 months)
  • Minist re de l Europe et des Affaires trang res (for 61 months)
  • Cloudways Ltd (for 51 months)
  • Dinahosting SL (for 49 months)
  • Bauer Xcel Media Deutschland KG (for 43 months)
  • Platform.sh SAS (for 43 months)
  • Moxa Inc. (for 37 months)
  • sipgate GmbH (for 34 months)
  • OVH US LLC (for 32 months)
  • Tilburg University (for 32 months)
  • GSI Helmholtzzentrum f r Schwerionenforschung GmbH (for 23 months)
  • Soliton Systems K.K. (for 21 months)
• Bronze sponsors:
  • Evolix (for 115 months)
  • Seznam.cz, a.s. (for 115 months)
  • Intevation GmbH (for 112 months)
  • Linuxhotel GmbH (for 112 months)
  • Daevel SARL (for 110 months)
  • Bitfolk LTD (for 109 months)
  • Megaspace Internet Services GmbH (for 109 months)
  • Greenbone AG (for 108 months)
  • NUMLOG (for 108 months)
  • WinGo AG (for 108 months)
  • Ecole Centrale de Nantes - LHEEA (for 104 months)
  • Entr ouvert (for 99 months)
  • Adfinis AG (for 96 months)
  • GNI MEDIA (for 91 months)
  • Laboratoire LEGI - UMR 5519 / CNRS (for 91 months)
  • Tesorion (for 91 months)
  • Bearstech (for 82 months)
  • LiHAS (for 82 months)
  • Catalyst IT Ltd (for 77 months)
  • Supagro (for 72 months)
  • Demarcq SAS (for 71 months)
  • Universit Grenoble Alpes (for 57 months)
  • TouchWeb SAS (for 49 months)
  • SPiN AG (for 46 months)
  • CoreFiling (for 41 months)
  • Institut des sciences cognitives Marc Jeannerod (for 36 months)
  • Observatoire des Sciences de l Univers de Grenoble (for 33 months)
  • Tem Innovations GmbH (for 27 months)
  • WordFinder.pro (for 27 months)
  • CNRS DT INSU R sif (for 26 months)
  • Alter Way (for 19 months)
  • Institut Camille Jordan (for 8 months)

My earlier work on Streamlined NTRU Prime has been progressing along. The IETF document on sntrup761 in SSH has passed several process points. GnuPG s libgcrypt has added support for sntrup761. The libssh support for sntrup761 is working, but the merge request is stuck mostly due to lack of time to debug why the regression test suite sporadically errors out in non-sntrup761 related parts with the patch. The foundation for lattice-based post-quantum algorithms has some uncertainty around it, and I have felt that there is more to the post-quantum story than adding sntrup761 to implementations. Classic McEliece has been mentioned to me a couple of times, and I took some time to learn it and did a cut n paste job of the proposed ISO standard and published draft-josefsson-mceliece in the IETF to make the algorithm easily available to the IETF community. A high-quality implementation of Classic McEliece has been published as libmceliece and I ve been supporting the work of Jan Moj to package libmceliece for Debian, alas it has been stuck in the ftp-master NEW queue for manual review for over two months. The pre-dependencies librandombytes and libcpucycles are available in Debian already. All that text writing and packaging work set the scene to write some code. When I added support for sntrup761 in libssh, I became familiar with the OpenSSH code base, so it was natural to return to OpenSSH to experiment with a new SSH KEX for Classic McEliece. DJB suggested to pick mceliece6688128 and combine it with the existing X25519+sntrup761 or with plain X25519. While a three-algorithm hybrid between X25519, sntrup761 and mceliece6688128 would be a simple drop-in for those that don t want to lose the benefits offered by sntrup761, I decided to start the journey on a pure combination of X25519 with mceliece6688128. The key combiner in sntrup761x25519 is a simple SHA512 call and the only good I can say about that is that it is simple to describe and implement, and doesn t raise too many questions since it is already deployed. After procrastinating coding for months, once I sat down to work it only took a couple of hours until I had a successful Classic McEliece SSH connection. I suppose my brain had sorted everything in background before I started. To reproduce it, please try the following in a Debian testing environment (I use podman to get a clean environment).

# podman run -it --rm debian:testing-slim
apt update
apt dist-upgrade -y
apt install -y wget python3 librandombytes-dev libcpucycles-dev gcc make git autoconf libz-dev libssl-dev
cd ~
wget -q -O- https://lib.mceliece.org/libmceliece-20230612.tar.gz   tar xfz -
cd libmceliece-20230612/
./configure
make install
ldconfig
cd ..
git clone https://gitlab.com/jas/openssh-portable
cd openssh-portable
git checkout jas/mceliece
autoreconf
./configure # verify 'libmceliece support: yes'
make # CC="cc -DDEBUG_KEX=1 -DDEBUG_KEXDH=1 -DDEBUG_KEXECDH=1"

You should now have a working SSH client and server that supports Classic McEliece! Verify support by running ./ssh -Q kex and it should mention mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com. To have it print plenty of debug outputs, you may remove the # character on the final line, but don t use such a build in production. You can test it as follows:

./ssh-keygen -A # writes to /usr/local/etc/ssh_host_...
# setup public-key based login by running the following:
./ssh-keygen -t rsa -f ~/.ssh/id_rsa -P ""
cat ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub > ~/.ssh/authorized_keys
adduser --system sshd
mkdir /var/empty
while true; do $PWD/sshd -p 2222 -f /dev/null; done &
./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com date

On the client you should see output like this:

OpenSSH_9.5p1, OpenSSL 3.0.11 19 Sep 2023
...
debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEXINIT sent
debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEXINIT received
debug1: kex: algorithm: mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com
debug1: kex: host key algorithm: ssh-ed25519
debug1: kex: server->client cipher: chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com MAC: <implicit> compression: none
debug1: kex: client->server cipher: chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com MAC: <implicit> compression: none
debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_KEX_ECDH_REPLY
debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEX_ECDH_REPLY received
debug1: Server host key: ssh-ed25519 SHA256:YognhWY7+399J+/V8eAQWmM3UFDLT0dkmoj3pIJ0zXs
...
debug1: Host '[localhost]:2222' is known and matches the ED25519 host key.
debug1: Found key in /root/.ssh/known_hosts:1
debug1: rekey out after 134217728 blocks
debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS sent
debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS
debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS received
debug1: rekey in after 134217728 blocks
...
debug1: Sending command: date
debug1: pledge: fork
debug1: permanently_set_uid: 0/0
Environment:
  USER=root
  LOGNAME=root
  HOME=/root
  PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/bin
  MAIL=/var/mail/root
  SHELL=/bin/bash
  SSH_CLIENT=::1 46894 2222
  SSH_CONNECTION=::1 46894 ::1 2222
debug1: client_input_channel_req: channel 0 rtype exit-status reply 0
debug1: client_input_channel_req: channel 0 rtype eow@openssh.com reply 0
Sat Dec  9 22:22:40 UTC 2023
debug1: channel 0: free: client-session, nchannels 1
Transferred: sent 1048044, received 3500 bytes, in 0.0 seconds
Bytes per second: sent 23388935.4, received 78108.6
debug1: Exit status 0

Notice the kex: algorithm: mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com output. How about network bandwidth usage? Below is a comparison of a complete SSH client connection such as the one above that log in and print date and logs out. Plain X25519 is around 7kb, X25519 with sntrup761 is around 9kb, and mceliece6688128 with X25519 is around 1MB. Yes, Classic McEliece has large keys, but for many environments, 1MB of data for the session establishment will barely be noticeable.

./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=curve25519-sha256 date 2>&1   grep ^Transferred
Transferred: sent 3028, received 3612 bytes, in 0.0 seconds
./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=sntrup761x25519-sha512@openssh.com date 2>&1   grep ^Transferred
Transferred: sent 4212, received 4596 bytes, in 0.0 seconds
./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com date 2>&1   grep ^Transferred
Transferred: sent 1048044, received 3764 bytes, in 0.0 seconds

So how about session establishment time?

date; i=0; while test $i -le 100; do ./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=curve25519-sha256 date > /dev/null 2>&1; i= expr $i + 1 ; done; date
Sat Dec  9 22:39:19 UTC 2023
Sat Dec  9 22:39:25 UTC 2023
# 6 seconds
date; i=0; while test $i -le 100; do ./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=sntrup761x25519-sha512@openssh.com date > /dev/null 2>&1; i= expr $i + 1 ; done; date
Sat Dec  9 22:39:29 UTC 2023
Sat Dec  9 22:39:38 UTC 2023
# 9 seconds
date; i=0; while test $i -le 100; do ./ssh -v -p 2222 localhost -oKexAlgorithms=mceliece6688128x25519-sha512@openssh.com date > /dev/null 2>&1; i= expr $i + 1 ; done; date
Sat Dec  9 22:39:55 UTC 2023
Sat Dec  9 22:40:07 UTC 2023
# 12 seconds

I never noticed adding sntrup761, so I m pretty sure I wouldn t notice this increase either. This is all running on my laptop that runs Trisquel so take it with a grain of salt but at least the magnitude is clear. Future work items include:

• Use a better hybrid mode combiner than SHA512? See for example KEM Combiners.
• Write IETF document describing the Classic McEliece SSH protocol
• Submit my patch to the OpenSSH community for discussion and feedback, please review meanwhile!
• Implement a mceliece6688128sntrup761x25519 multi-hybrid mode?
• Write a shell script a la sntrup761.sh to import a stripped-down mceliece6688128 implementation to avoid having OpenSSH depend on libmceliece?
• My kexmceliece6688128x25519.c is really just kexsntrup761x25519.c with the three calls to sntrup761 replaced with mceliece6688128. This should be parametrized to avoid cut n paste of code, if the OpenSSH community is interested.
• Consider if the behaviour of librandombytes related to closing of file descriptors is relevant to OpenSSH.

Happy post-quantum SSH ing! Update: Changing the mceliece6688128_keypair call to mceliece6688128f_keypair (i.e., using the fully compatible f-variant) results in McEliece being just as fast as sntrup761 on my machine. Update 2023-12-26: An initial IETF document draft-josefsson-ssh-mceliece-00 published.

dkg's New OpenPGP certificate in December 2023 In December of 2023, I'm moving to a new OpenPGP certificate. You might know my old OpenPGP certificate, which had an fingerprint of C29F8A0C01F35E34D816AA5CE092EB3A5CA10DBA. My new OpenPGP certificate has a fingerprint of: D477040C70C2156A5C298549BB7E9101495E6BF7. Both certificates have the same set of User IDs:

• Daniel Kahn Gillmor
• <dkg@debian.org>
• <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>

You can find a version of this transition statement signed by both the old and new certificates at: https://dkg.fifthhorseman.net/2023-dkg-openpgp-transition.txt The new OpenPGP certificate is:

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----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=9Yc8
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

When I have some reasonable number of certifications, i'll update the certificate associated with my e-mail addresses on https://keys.openpgp.org, in DANE, and in WKD. Until then, those lookups should continue to provide the old certificate.

Welcome to the November 2023 report from the Reproducible Builds project! In these reports we outline the most important things that we have been up to over the past month. As a rather rapid recap, whilst anyone may inspect the source code of free software for malicious flaws, almost all software is distributed to end users as pre-compiled binaries (more).

---

Reproducible Builds Summit 2023 Between October 31st and November 2nd, we held our seventh Reproducible Builds Summit in Hamburg, Germany! Amazingly, the agenda and all notes from all sessions are all online many thanks to everyone who wrote notes from the sessions. As a followup on one idea, started at the summit, Alexander Couzens and Holger Levsen started work on a cache (or tailored front-end) for the snapshot.debian.org service. The general idea is that, when rebuilding Debian, you do not actually need the whole ~140TB of data from snapshot.debian.org; rather, only a very small subset of the packages are ever used for for building. It turns out, for amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, riscv64 and s390 for Debian trixie, unstable and experimental, this is only around 500GB ie. less than 1%. Although the new service not yet ready for usage, it has already provided a promising outlook in this regard. More information is available on https://rebuilder-snapshot.debian.net and we hope that this service becomes usable in the coming weeks. The adjacent picture shows a sticky note authored by Jan-Benedict Glaw at the summit in Hamburg, confirming Holger Levsen s theory that rebuilding all Debian packages needs a very small subset of packages, the text states that 69,200 packages (in Debian sid) list 24,850 packages in their .buildinfo files, in 8,0200 variations. This little piece of paper was the beginning of rebuilder-snapshot and is a direct outcome of the summit! The Reproducible Builds team would like to thank our event sponsors who include Mullvad VPN, openSUSE, Debian, Software Freedom Conservancy, Allotropia and Aspiration Tech.

Beyond Trusting FOSS presentation at SeaGL On November 4th, Vagrant Cascadian presented Beyond Trusting FOSS at SeaGL in Seattle, WA in the United States. Founded in 2013, SeaGL is a free, grassroots technical summit dedicated to spreading awareness and knowledge about free source software, hardware and culture. The summary of Vagrant s talk mentions that it will:

[ ] introduce the concepts of Reproducible Builds, including best practices for developing and releasing software, the tools available to help diagnose issues, and touch on progress towards solving decades-old deeply pervasive fundamental security issues Learn how to verify and demonstrate trust, rather than simply hoping everything is OK!

Germane to the contents of the talk, the slides for Vagrant s talk can be built reproducibly, resulting in a PDF with a SHA1 of cfde2f8a0b7e6ec9b85377eeac0661d728b70f34 when built on Debian bookworm and c21fab273232c550ce822c4b0d9988e6c49aa2c3 on Debian sid at the time of writing.

Human Factors in Software Supply Chain Security Marcel Fourn , Dominik Wermke, Sascha Fahl and Yasemin Acar have published an article in a Special Issue of the IEEE s Security & Privacy magazine. Entitled A Viewpoint on Human Factors in Software Supply Chain Security: A Research Agenda, the paper justifies the need for reproducible builds to reach developers and end-users specifically, and furthermore points out some under-researched topics that we have seen mentioned in interviews. An author pre-print of the article is available in PDF form.

Community updates On our mailing list this month:

• Julien Lepiller mentioned that they were interested in translating our website, and provided offered GNU Guix s translation framework (Weblate) as a potential model to emulate.
• Bernhard M. Wiedemann posted a positive LibreOffice success story documenting that, after some work:

  [ ] today I hold in my hands the first two bit-identical LibreOffice rpm packages. And this is the success I wanted to share with you all today [and] it makes me feel as if we can solve anything.

• kpcyrd reported on their excellent results with making esp32c3 microcontroller firmware reproducible with Rust, repro-env and Arch Linux:

  I chose the esp32c3 [board] because it has good Rust support from the esp-rs project, and you can get a dev board for about 6-8 . To document my build environment I used repro-env together with Arch Linux because its archive is very reliable and contains all the different Rust development tools I needed.

• Separate to their work on LibreOffice however, Bernhard M. Wiedemann also requested assistance with a number of packages that so far refuse to build reproducibly. He writes that the common theme around them is that they use scheme or lisp to produce binaries with a dump command and hopes that someone may be able to help.
• Finally, Fay Stegerman regrettably reports that she will no longer be able to work on Android reproducible builds nor update the Reproducible Builds community with the status of reproducibility within F-Droid.

openSUSE updates Bernhard M. Wiedemann has created a wiki page outlining an proposal to create a general-purpose Linux distribution which consists of 100% bit-reproducible packages albeit minus the embedded signature within RPM files. It would be based on openSUSE Tumbleweed or, if available, its Slowroll-variant. In addition, Bernhard posted another monthly update for his work elsewhere in openSUSE.

Reproducibility-related changes in Debian As recently reported in the most recent Debian Developer News, Paul Gevers has integrated a package s reproducibility status into the way Debian migrates packages into the next stable release. For the amd64, arm64, i386 and armhf architectures, data is collected from the Reproducible Builds testing framework is collected by this migration software even though, at the time of writing, it neither causes nor migration bonuses nor blocks migration. Indeed, the information only results are visible on Britney s excuses as well as on individual packages pages on tracker.debian.org.

Ubuntu Launchpad now supports .buildinfo files Back in 2017, Steve Langasek filed a bug against Ubuntu s Launchpad code hosting platform to report that .changes files (artifacts of building Ubuntu and Debian packages) reference .buildinfo files that aren t actually exposed by Launchpad itself. This was causing issues when attempting to process .changes files with tools such as Lintian. However, it was noticed last month that, in early August of this year, Simon Quigley had resolved this issue, and .buildinfo files are now available from the Launchpad system.

PHP reproducibility updates There have been two updates from the PHP programming language this month. Firstly, the widely-deployed PHPUnit framework for the PHP programming language have recently released version 10.5.0, which introduces the inclusion of a composer.lock file, ensuring total reproducibility of the shipped binary file. Further details and the discussion that went into their particular implementation can be found on the associated GitHub pull request. In addition, the presentation Leveraging Nix in the PHP ecosystem has been given in late October at the PHP International Conference in Munich by Pol Dellaiera. While the video replay is not yet available, the (reproducible) presentation slides and speaker notes are available.

diffoscope changes diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility that can locate and diagnose reproducibility issues. This month, Chris Lamb made a number of changes, including:

• Improving DOS/MBR extraction by adding support for 7z. [ ]
• Adding a missing RequiredToolNotFound import. [ ]
• As a UI/UX improvement, try and avoid printing an extended traceback if diffoscope runs out of memory. [ ]
• Mark diffoscope as stable on PyPI.org. [ ]
• Uploading version 252 to Debian unstable. [ ]

Website updates A huge number of notes were added to our website that were taken at our recent Reproducible Builds Summit held between October 31st and November 2nd in Hamburg, Germany. In particular, a big thanks to Arnout Engelen, Bernhard M. Wiedemann, Daan De Meyer, Evangelos Ribeiro Tzaras, Holger Levsen and Orhun Parmaks z. In addition to this, a number of other changes were made, including:

• Chris Lamb migrated the website s homepage to a hero image [ ], improved the documentation related to SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH and CMake [ ], added iomart (ne Bytemark) and DigitalOcean to our sponsors page [ ] and dropped an unnecessary link on some horizontal navigation buttons [ ].
• Holger Levsen also made a large number of notes pages from our 2022 summit in Venice [ ], migrated the website s syntax highlighter from [Pygments]https://pygments.org/() to Rouge [ ], fixed some grammar on our donate page [ ][ ][ ] and did a lot of updates to the Hamburg Summit s general information page [ ][ ].

Upstream patches The Reproducible Builds project detects, dissects and attempts to fix as many currently-unreproducible packages as possible. We endeavour to send all of our patches upstream where appropriate. This month, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:

• Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
  • amber-cli (date-related issue)
  • bin86 (FTBFS-2038)
  • buildah (timestamp)
  • colord (CPU)
  • google-noto-fonts (file modification issue)
  • grub2 (directory-related metadata)
  • guile-fibers (parallelism issue)
  • guile-newt (parallelism issue)
  • gutenprint (embedded date/hostname)
  • hub (random build path)
  • ipxe (nondeterministic behavoiour)
  • joker / joker
  • kopete (undefined behaviour)
  • kraft (embedde hostname)
  • libcamera (signature)
  • libguestfs (embeds build host file)
  • llvm (toolchain/Rust-related issue)
  • nfdump (date-related issue)
  • ovmf (unknown cause)
  • quazip (missing fonts)
  • rdflib (nondeterminstic behaviour)
  • rpm (toolchain)
  • tigervnc (embedded an RSA signature)
  • whatsie (date-related issue)
  • xen (time-related issue)
• Cathy Hu:
  • policycoreutils (sort-related issue)
• Chris Lamb:
  • #1055919 filed against python-ansible-pygments.
  • #1055920 filed against bidict.
  • #1056117 filed against meson.
  • #1056118 filed against radsecproxy.
  • #1056119 filed against taffybar.
  • #1056398 filed against php-doc.
  • #1056571 filed against pelican.
  • #1056572 filed against maildir-utils.
  • #1056573 filed against openmrac-data.
  • #1056649 filed against vectorscan.
• Vagrant Cascadian:
  • #1055969 filed against kuttypy.

Reproducibility testing framework The Reproducible Builds project operates a comprehensive testing framework (available at tests.reproducible-builds.org) in order to check packages and other artifacts for reproducibility. In October, a number of changes were made by Holger Levsen:

• Debian-related changes:
  • Track packages marked as Priority: important in a new package set. [ ][ ]
  • Stop scheduling packages that fail to build from source in bookworm [ ] and bullseye. [ ].
  • Add old releases dashboard link in web navigation. [ ]
  • Permit re-run of the pool_buildinfos script to be re-run for a specific year. [ ]
  • Grant jbglaw access to the osuosl4 node [ ][ ] along with lynxis [ ].
  • Increase RAM on the amd64 Ionos builders from 48 GiB to 64 GiB; thanks IONOS! [ ]
  • Move buster to archived suites. [ ][ ]
  • Reduce the number of arm64 architecture workers from 24 to 16 in order to improve stability [ ], reduce the workers for amd64 from 32 to 28 and, for i386, reduce from 12 down to 8 [ ].
  • Show the entire build history of each Debian package. [ ]
  • Stop scheduling already tested package/version combinations in Debian bookworm. [ ]
• Snapshot service for rebuilders
  • Add an HTTP-based API endpoint. [ ][ ]
  • Add a Gunicorn instance to serve the HTTP API. [ ]
  • Add an NGINX config [ ][ ][ ][ ]
• System-health:
  • Detect failures due to HTTP 503 Service Unavailable errors. [ ]
  • Detect failures to update package sets. [ ]
  • Detect unmet dependencies. (This usually occurs with builds of Debian live-build.) [ ]
• Misc-related changes:
  • do install systemd-ommd on jenkins. [ ]
  • fix harmless typo in squid.conf for codethink04. [ ]
  • fixup: reproducible Debian: add gunicorn service to serve /api for rebuilder-snapshot.d.o. [ ]
  • Increase codethink04 s Squid cache_dir size setting to 16 GiB. [ ]
  • Don t install systemd-oomd as it unfortunately kills sshd [ ]
  • Use debootstrap from backports when commisioning nodes. [ ]
  • Add the live_build_debian_stretch_gnome, debsums-tests_buster and debsums-tests_buster jobs to the zombie list. [ ][ ]
  • Run jekyll build with the --watch argument when building the Reproducible Builds website. [ ]
  • Misc node maintenance. [ ][ ][ ]

Other changes were made as well, however, including Mattia Rizzolo fixing rc.local s Bash syntax so it can actually run [ ], commenting away some file cleanup code that is (potentially) deleting too much [ ] and fixing the html_brekages page for Debian package builds [ ]. Finally, diagnosed and submitted a patch to add a AddEncoding gzip .gz line to the tests.reproducible-builds.org Apache configuration so that Gzip files aren t re-compressed as Gzip which some clients can t deal with (as well as being a waste of time). [ ]

---

If you are interested in contributing to the Reproducible Builds project, please visit our Contribute page on our website. However, you can get in touch with us via:

• IRC: #reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
• Mailing list: rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
• Mastodon: @reproducible_builds
• Twitter: @ReproBuilds

Hello from a snowy Montr al! My life has been pretty busy lately¹ so please forgive this late report. On November 19th, our local Debian User Group met at Montreal's most prominent hackerspace, Foulab. We've been there a few times already, but since our last visit, Foulab has had some membership/financial troubles. Happy to say things are going well again and a new team has taken over the space. This meetup wasn't the most productive day for me (something about being exhausted apparently makes it hard to concentrate), but other people did a bunch of interesting stuff :)

• Kienan & Gabriel worked on the libinfluxdb-http-perl package (now in Sid!), which is needed for smokeping.
• J r me worked on updating JRuby to the latest upstream version.
• I failed to update monitoring-plugins-systemd to the latest upstream version. It seems the entire test suite has been re-written and I couldn't make it work in sbuild...
• Tiago and Tassia worked on the Debian Contributors website. More specifically, they added a DSA domains data source and created a scheduler on dcf.debian.net to make daily updates on the data sources in the dc-sources repository.
• Michael worked on the 2024 NorthSec badge.
• Gerard worked on debugging his broken AirGradient board.

Pictures Here are a bunch of pictures I took! Foulab is always a great place to snap quirky things :)

The following contributors got their Debian Developer accounts in the last two months:

• Fran ois Mazen (mzf)
• Andrew Ruthven (puck)
• Christopher Obbard (obbardc)
• Salvo Tomaselli (ltworf)

The following contributors were added as Debian Maintainers in the last two months:

• Bo YU
• Athos Coimbra Ribeiro
• Marc Leeman
• Filip Str mb ck

Congratulations!

I do not think seasoned Debian contributors quite appreciate how much knowledge we have picked up and internalized. As an example, when I need to look up documentation for debhelper, I generally know which manpage to look in. I suspect most long time contributors would be able to a similar thing (maybe down 2-3 manpages). But new contributors does not have the luxury of years of experience. This problem is by no means unique to debhelper. One thing that debhelper does very well, is that it is hard for users to tell where a addon "starts" and debhelper "ends". It is clear you use addons, but the transition in and out of third party provided tools is generally smooth. This is a sign that things "just work(tm)". Except when it comes to documentation. Here, debhelper's static documentation does not include documentation for third party tooling. If you think from a debhelper maintainer's perspective, this seems obvious. Embedding documentation for all the third-party code would be very hard work, a layer-violation, etc.. But from a user perspective, we should not have to care "who" provides "what". As as user, I want to understand how this works and the more hoops I have to jump through to get that understanding, the more frustrated I will be with the toolstack. With this, I came to the conclusion that the best way to help users and solve the problem of finding the documentation was to provide "online documentation". It should be possible to ask debputy, "What attributes can I use in install-man?" or "What does path-metadata do?". Additionally, the lookup should work the same no matter if debputy provided the feature or some third-party plugin did. In the future, perhaps also other types of documentation such as tutorials or how-to guides. Below, I have some tentative results of my work so far. There are some improvements to be done. Notably, the commands for these documentation features are still treated a "plugin" subcommand features and should probably have its own top level "ask-me-anything" subcommand in the future.

Did you hear the news? Firefox development is moving from Mercurial to Git. While the decision is far from being mine, and I was barely involved in the small incremental changes that ultimately led to this decision, I feel I have to take at least some responsibility. And if you are one of those who would rather use Mercurial than Git, you may direct all your ire at me. But let's take a step back and review the past 25 years leading to this decision. You'll forgive me for skipping some details and any possible inaccuracies. This is already a long post, while I could have been more thorough, even I think that would have been too much. This is also not an official Mozilla position, only my personal perception and recollection as someone who was involved at times, but mostly an observer from a distance. From CVS to DVCS From its release in 1998, the Mozilla source code was kept in a CVS repository. If you're too young to know what CVS is, let's just say it's an old school version control system, with its set of problems. Back then, it was mostly ubiquitous in the Open Source world, as far as I remember. In the early 2000s, the Subversion version control system gained some traction, solving some of the problems that came with CVS. Incidentally, Subversion was created by Jim Blandy, who now works at Mozilla on completely unrelated matters. In the same period, the Linux kernel development moved from CVS to Bitkeeper, which was more suitable to the distributed nature of the Linux community. BitKeeper had its own problem, though: it was the opposite of Open Source, but for most pragmatic people, it wasn't a real concern because free access was provided. Until it became a problem: someone at OSDL developed an alternative client to BitKeeper, and licenses of BitKeeper were rescinded for OSDL members, including Linus Torvalds (they were even prohibited from purchasing one). Following this fiasco, in April 2005, two weeks from each other, both Git and Mercurial were born. The former was created by Linus Torvalds himself, while the latter was developed by Olivia Mackall, who was a Linux kernel developer back then. And because they both came out of the same community for the same needs, and the same shared experience with BitKeeper, they both were similar distributed version control systems. Interestingly enough, several other DVCSes existed:

• SVK, a DVCS built on top of Subversion, allowing users to create local (offline) branches of remote Subversion repositories. It was also known for its powerful merging capabilities. I picked it at some point for my Debian work, mainly because I needed to interact with Subversion repositories.
• Arch (tla), later known as GNU arch. From what I remember, it was awful to use. You think Git is complex or confusing? Arch was way worse. It was forked as "Bazaar", but the fork was abandoned in favor of "Bazaar-NG", now known as "Bazaar" or "bzr", a much more user-friendly DVCS. The first release of Bzr actually precedes Git's by two weeks. I guess it was too new to be considered by Linus Torvalds for the Linux kernel needs.
• Monotone, which I don't know much about, but it was mentioned by Linus Torvalds two days before the initial Git commit of Git. As far as I know, it was too slow for the Linux kernel's needs. I'll note in passing that Monotone is the creation of Graydon Hoare, who also created Rust.
• Darcs, with its patch-based model, rather than the common snapshot-based model, allowed more flexible management of changes. This approach came, however, at the expense of performance.

In this landscape, the major difference Git was making at the time was that it was blazing fast. Almost incredibly so, at least on Linux systems. That was less true on other platforms (especially Windows). It was a game-changer for handling large codebases in a smooth manner. Anyways, two years later, in 2007, Mozilla decided to move its source code not to Bzr, not to Git, not to Subversion (which, yes, was a contender), but to Mercurial. The decision "process" was laid down in two rather colorful blog posts. My memory is a bit fuzzy, but I don't recall that it was a particularly controversial choice. All of those DVCSes were still young, and there was no definite "winner" yet (GitHub hadn't even been founded). It made the most sense for Mozilla back then, mainly because the Git experience on Windows still wasn't there, and that mattered a lot for Mozilla, with its diverse platform support. As a contributor, I didn't think much of it, although to be fair, at the time, I was mostly consuming the source tarballs. Personal preferences Digging through my archives, I've unearthed a forgotten chapter: I did end up setting up both a Mercurial and a Git mirror of the Firefox source repository on alioth.debian.org. Alioth.debian.org was a FusionForge-based collaboration system for Debian developers, similar to SourceForge. It was the ancestor of salsa.debian.org. I used those mirrors for the Debian packaging of Firefox (cough cough Iceweasel). The Git mirror was created with hg-fast-export, and the Mercurial mirror was only a necessary step in the process. By that time, I had converted my Subversion repositories to Git, and switched off SVK. Incidentally, I started contributing to Git around that time as well. I apparently did this not too long after Mozilla switched to Mercurial. As a Linux user, I think I just wanted the speed that Mercurial was not providing. Not that Mercurial was that slow, but the difference between a couple seconds and a couple hundred milliseconds was a significant enough difference in user experience for me to prefer Git (and Firefox was not the only thing I was using version control for) Other people had also similarly created their own mirror, or with other tools. But none of them were "compatible": their commit hashes were different. Hg-git, used by the latter, was putting extra information in commit messages that would make the conversion differ, and hg-fast-export would just not be consistent with itself! My mirror is long gone, and those have not been updated in more than a decade. I did end up using Mercurial, when I got commit access to the Firefox source repository in April 2010. I still kept using Git for my Debian activities, but I now was also using Mercurial to push to the Mozilla servers. I joined Mozilla as a contractor a few months after that, and kept using Mercurial for a while, but as a, by then, long time Git user, it never really clicked for me. It turns out, the sentiment was shared by several at Mozilla. Git incursion In the early 2010s, GitHub was becoming ubiquitous, and the Git mindshare was getting large. Multiple projects at Mozilla were already entirely hosted on GitHub. As for the Firefox source code base, Mozilla back then was kind of a Wild West, and engineers being engineers, multiple people had been using Git, with their own inconvenient workflows involving a local Mercurial clone. The most popular set of scripts was moz-git-tools, to incorporate changes in a local Git repository into the local Mercurial copy, to then send to Mozilla servers. In terms of the number of people doing that, though, I don't think it was a lot of people, probably a few handfuls. On my end, I was still keeping up with Mercurial. I think at that time several engineers had their own unofficial Git mirrors on GitHub, and later on Ehsan Akhgari provided another mirror, with a twist: it also contained the full CVS history, which the canonical Mercurial repository didn't have. This was particularly interesting for engineers who needed to do some code archeology and couldn't get past the 2007 cutoff of the Mercurial repository. I think that mirror ultimately became the official-looking, but really unofficial, mozilla-central repository on GitHub. On a side note, a Mercurial repository containing the CVS history was also later set up, but that didn't lead to something officially supported on the Mercurial side. Some time around 2011~2012, I started to more seriously consider using Git for work myself, but wasn't satisfied with the workflows others had set up for themselves. I really didn't like the idea of wasting extra disk space keeping a Mercurial clone around while using a Git mirror. I wrote a Python script that would use Mercurial as a library to access a remote repository and produce a git-fast-import stream. That would allow the creation of a git repository without a local Mercurial clone. It worked quite well, but it was not able to incrementally update. Other, more complete tools existed already, some of which I mentioned above. But as time was passing and the size and depth of the Mercurial repository was growing, these tools were showing their limits and were too slow for my taste, especially for the initial clone. Boot to Git In the same time frame, Mozilla ventured in the Mobile OS sphere with Boot to Gecko, later known as Firefox OS. What does that have to do with version control? The needs of third party collaborators in the mobile space led to the creation of what is now the gecko-dev repository on GitHub. As I remember it, it was challenging to create, but once it was there, Git users could just clone it and have a working, up-to-date local copy of the Firefox source code and its history... which they could already have, but this was the first officially supported way of doing so. Coincidentally, Ehsan's unofficial mirror was having trouble (to the point of GitHub closing the repository) and was ultimately shut down in December 2013. You'll often find comments on the interwebs about how GitHub has become unreliable since the Microsoft acquisition. I can't really comment on that, but if you think GitHub is unreliable now, rest assured that it was worse in its beginning. And its sustainability as a platform also wasn't a given, being a rather new player. So on top of having this official mirror on GitHub, Mozilla also ventured in setting up its own Git server for greater control and reliability. But the canonical repository was still the Mercurial one, and while Git users now had a supported mirror to pull from, they still had to somehow interact with Mercurial repositories, most notably for the Try server. Git slowly creeping in Firefox build tooling Still in the same time frame, tooling around building Firefox was improving drastically. For obvious reasons, when version control integration was needed in the tooling, Mercurial support was always a no-brainer. The first explicit acknowledgement of a Git repository for the Firefox source code, other than the addition of the .gitignore file, was bug 774109. It added a script to install the prerequisites to build Firefox on macOS (still called OSX back then), and that would print a message inviting people to obtain a copy of the source code with either Mercurial or Git. That was a precursor to current bootstrap.py, from September 2012. Following that, as far as I can tell, the first real incursion of Git in the Firefox source tree tooling happened in bug 965120. A few days earlier, bug 952379 had added a mach clang-format command that would apply clang-format-diff to the output from hg diff. Obviously, running hg diff on a Git working tree didn't work, and bug 965120 was filed, and support for Git was added there. That was in January 2014. A year later, when the initial implementation of mach artifact was added (which ultimately led to artifact builds), Git users were an immediate thought. But while they were considered, it was not to support them, but to avoid actively breaking their workflows. Git support for mach artifact was eventually added 14 months later, in March 2016. From gecko-dev to git-cinnabar Let's step back a little here, back to the end of 2014. My user experience with Mercurial had reached a level of dissatisfaction that was enough for me to decide to take that script from a couple years prior and make it work for incremental updates. That meant finding a way to store enough information locally to be able to reconstruct whatever the incremental updates would be relying on (guess why other tools hid a local Mercurial clone under hood). I got something working rather quickly, and after talking to a few people about this side project at the Mozilla Portland All Hands and seeing their excitement, I published a git-remote-hg initial prototype on the last day of the All Hands. Within weeks, the prototype gained the ability to directly push to Mercurial repositories, and a couple months later, was renamed to git-cinnabar. At that point, as a Git user, instead of cloning the gecko-dev repository from GitHub and switching to a local Mercurial repository whenever you needed to push to a Mercurial repository (i.e. the aforementioned Try server, or, at the time, for reviews), you could just clone and push directly from/to Mercurial, all within Git. And it was fast too. You could get a full clone of mozilla-central in less than half an hour, when at the time, other similar tools would take more than 10 hours (needless to say, it's even worse now). Another couple months later (we're now at the end of April 2015), git-cinnabar became able to start off a local clone of the gecko-dev repository, rather than clone from scratch, which could be time consuming. But because git-cinnabar and the tool that was updating gecko-dev weren't producing the same commits, this setup was cumbersome and not really recommended. For instance, if you pushed something to mozilla-central with git-cinnabar from a gecko-dev clone, it would come back with a different commit hash in gecko-dev, and you'd have to deal with the divergence. Eventually, in April 2020, the scripts updating gecko-dev were switched to git-cinnabar, making the use of gecko-dev alongside git-cinnabar a more viable option. Ironically(?), the switch occurred to ease collaboration with KaiOS (you know, the mobile OS born from the ashes of Firefox OS). Well, okay, in all honesty, when the need of syncing in both directions between Git and Mercurial (we only had ever synced from Mercurial to Git) came up, I nudged Mozilla in the direction of git-cinnabar, which, in my (biased but still honest) opinion, was the more reliable option for two-way synchronization (we did have regular conversion problems with hg-git, nothing of the sort has happened since the switch). One Firefox repository to rule them all For reasons I don't know, Mozilla decided to use separate Mercurial repositories as "branches". With the switch to the rapid release process in 2011, that meant one repository for nightly (mozilla-central), one for aurora, one for beta, and one for release. And with the addition of Extended Support Releases in 2012, we now add a new ESR repository every year. Boot to Gecko also had its own branches, and so did Fennec (Firefox for Mobile, before Android). There are a lot of them. And then there are also integration branches, where developer's work lands before being merged in mozilla-central (or backed out if it breaks things), always leaving mozilla-central in a (hopefully) good state. Only one of them remains in use today, though. I can only suppose that the way Mercurial branches work was not deemed practical. It is worth noting, though, that Mercurial branches are used in some cases, to branch off a dot-release when the next major release process has already started, so it's not a matter of not knowing the feature exists or some such. In 2016, Gregory Szorc set up a new repository that would contain them all (or at least most of them), which eventually became what is now the mozilla-unified repository. This would e.g. simplify switching between branches when necessary. 7 years later, for some reason, the other "branches" still exist, but most developers are expected to be using mozilla-unified. Mozilla's CI also switched to using mozilla-unified as base repository. Honestly, I'm not sure why the separate repositories are still the main entry point for pushes, rather than going directly to mozilla-unified, but it probably comes down to switching being work, and not being a top priority. Also, it probably doesn't help that working with multiple heads in Mercurial, even (especially?) with bookmarks, can be a source of confusion. To give an example, if you aren't careful, and do a plain clone of the mozilla-unified repository, you may not end up on the latest mozilla-central changeset, but rather, e.g. one from beta, or some other branch, depending which one was last updated. Hosting is simple, right? Put your repository on a server, install hgweb or gitweb, and that's it? Maybe that works for... Mercurial itself, but that repository "only" has slightly over 50k changesets and less than 4k files. Mozilla-central has more than an order of magnitude more changesets (close to 700k) and two orders of magnitude more files (more than 700k if you count the deleted or moved files, 350k if you count the currently existing ones). And remember, there are a lot of "duplicates" of this repository. And I didn't even mention user repositories and project branches. Sure, it's a self-inflicted pain, and you'd think it could probably(?) be mitigated with shared repositories. But consider the simple case of two repositories: mozilla-central and autoland. You make autoland use mozilla-central as a shared repository. Now, you push something new to autoland, it's stored in the autoland datastore. Eventually, you merge to mozilla-central. Congratulations, it's now in both datastores, and you'd need to clean-up autoland if you wanted to avoid the duplication. Now, you'd think mozilla-unified would solve these issues, and it would... to some extent. Because that wouldn't cover user repositories and project branches briefly mentioned above, which in GitHub parlance would be considered as Forks. So you'd want a mega global datastore shared by all repositories, and repositories would need to only expose what they really contain. Does Mercurial support that? I don't think so (okay, I'll give you that: even if it doesn't, it could, but that's extra work). And since we're talking about a transition to Git, does Git support that? You may have read about how you can link to a commit from a fork and make-pretend that it comes from the main repository on GitHub? At least, it shows a warning, now. That's essentially the architectural reason why. So the actual answer is that Git doesn't support it out of the box, but GitHub has some backend magic to handle it somehow (and hopefully, other things like Gitea, Girocco, Gitlab, etc. have something similar). Now, to come back to the size of the repository. A repository is not a static file. It's a server with which you negotiate what you have against what it has that you want. Then the server bundles what you asked for based on what you said you have. Or in the opposite direction, you negotiate what you have that it doesn't, you send it, and the server incorporates what you sent it. Fortunately the latter is less frequent and requires authentication. But the former is more frequent and CPU intensive. Especially when pulling a large number of changesets, which, incidentally, cloning is. "But there is a solution for clones" you might say, which is true. That's clonebundles, which offload the CPU intensive part of cloning to a single job scheduled regularly. Guess who implemented it? Mozilla. But that only covers the cloning part. We actually had laid the ground to support offloading large incremental updates and split clones, but that never materialized. Even with all that, that still leaves you with a server that can display file contents, diffs, blames, provide zip archives of a revision, and more, all of which are CPU intensive in their own way. And these endpoints are regularly abused, and cause extra load to your servers, yes plural, because of course a single server won't handle the load for the number of users of your big repositories. And because your endpoints are abused, you have to close some of them. And I'm not mentioning the Try repository with its tens of thousands of heads, which brings its own sets of problems (and it would have even more heads if we didn't fake-merge them once in a while). Of course, all the above applies to Git (and it only gained support for something akin to clonebundles last year). So, when the Firefox OS project was stopped, there wasn't much motivation to continue supporting our own Git server, Mercurial still being the official point of entry, and git.mozilla.org was shut down in 2016. The growing difficulty of maintaining the status quo Slowly, but steadily in more recent years, as new tooling was added that needed some input from the source code manager, support for Git was more and more consistently added. But at the same time, as people left for other endeavors and weren't necessarily replaced, or more recently with layoffs, resources allocated to such tooling have been spread thin. Meanwhile, the repository growth didn't take a break, and the Try repository was becoming an increasing pain, with push times quite often exceeding 10 minutes. The ongoing work to move Try pushes to Lando will hide the problem under the rug, but the underlying problem will still exist (although the last version of Mercurial seems to have improved things). On the flip side, more and more people have been relying on Git for Firefox development, to my own surprise, as I didn't really push for that to happen. It just happened organically, by ways of git-cinnabar existing, providing a compelling experience to those who prefer Git, and, I guess, word of mouth. I was genuinely surprised when I recently heard the use of Git among moz-phab users had surpassed a third. I did, however, occasionally orient people who struggled with Mercurial and said they were more familiar with Git, towards git-cinnabar. I suspect there's a somewhat large number of people who never realized Git was a viable option. But that, on its own, can come with its own challenges: if you use git-cinnabar without being backed by gecko-dev, you'll have a hard time sharing your branches on GitHub, because you can't push to a fork of gecko-dev without pushing your entire local repository, as they have different commit histories. And switching to gecko-dev when you weren't already using it requires some extra work to rebase all your local branches from the old commit history to the new one. Clone times with git-cinnabar have also started to go a little out of hand in the past few years, but this was mitigated in a similar manner as with the Mercurial cloning problem: with static files that are refreshed regularly. Ironically, that made cloning with git-cinnabar faster than cloning with Mercurial. But generating those static files is increasingly time-consuming. As of writing, generating those for mozilla-unified takes close to 7 hours. I was predicting clone times over 10 hours "in 5 years" in a post from 4 years ago, I wasn't too far off. With exponential growth, it could still happen, although to be fair, CPUs have improved since. I will explore the performance aspect in a subsequent blog post, alongside the upcoming release of git-cinnabar 0.7.0-b1. I don't even want to check how long it now takes with hg-git or git-remote-hg (they were already taking more than a day when git-cinnabar was taking a couple hours). I suppose it's about time that I clarify that git-cinnabar has always been a side-project. It hasn't been part of my duties at Mozilla, and the extent to which Mozilla supports git-cinnabar is in the form of taskcluster workers on the community instance for both git-cinnabar CI and generating those clone bundles. Consequently, that makes the above git-cinnabar specific issues a Me problem, rather than a Mozilla problem. Taking the leap I can't talk for the people who made the proposal to move to Git, nor for the people who put a green light on it. But I can at least give my perspective. Developers have regularly asked why Mozilla was still using Mercurial, but I think it was the first time that a formal proposal was laid out. And it came from the Engineering Workflow team, responsible for issue tracking, code reviews, source control, build and more. It's easy to say "Mozilla should have chosen Git in the first place", but back in 2007, GitHub wasn't there, Bitbucket wasn't there, and all the available options were rather new (especially compared to the then 21 years-old CVS). I think Mozilla made the right choice, all things considered. Had they waited a couple years, the story might have been different. You might say that Mozilla stayed with Mercurial for so long because of the sunk cost fallacy. I don't think that's true either. But after the biggest Mercurial repository hosting service turned off Mercurial support, and the main contributor to Mercurial going their own way, it's hard to ignore that the landscape has evolved. And the problems that we regularly encounter with the Mercurial servers are not going to get any better as the repository continues to grow. As far as I know, all the Mercurial repositories bigger than Mozilla's are... not using Mercurial. Google has its own closed-source server, and Facebook has another of its own, and it's not really public either. With resources spread thin, I don't expect Mozilla to be able to continue supporting a Mercurial server indefinitely (although I guess Octobus could be contracted to give a hand, but is that sustainable?). Mozilla, being a champion of Open Source, also doesn't live in a silo. At some point, you have to meet your contributors where they are. And the Open Source world is now majoritarily using Git. I'm sure the vast majority of new hires at Mozilla in the past, say, 5 years, know Git and have had to learn Mercurial (although they arguably didn't need to). Even within Mozilla, with thousands(!) of repositories on GitHub, Firefox is now actually the exception rather than the norm. I should even actually say Desktop Firefox, because even Mobile Firefox lives on GitHub (although Fenix is moving back in together with Desktop Firefox, and the timing is such that that will probably happen before Firefox moves to Git). Heck, even Microsoft moved to Git! With a significant developer base already using Git thanks to git-cinnabar, and all the constraints and problems I mentioned previously, it actually seems natural that a transition (finally) happens. However, had git-cinnabar or something similarly viable not existed, I don't think Mozilla would be in a position to take this decision. On one hand, it probably wouldn't be in the current situation of having to support both Git and Mercurial in the tooling around Firefox, nor the resource constraints related to that. But on the other hand, it would be farther from supporting Git and being able to make the switch in order to address all the other problems. But... GitHub? I hope I made a compelling case that hosting is not as simple as it can seem, at the scale of the Firefox repository. It's also not Mozilla's main focus. Mozilla has enough on its plate with the migration of existing infrastructure that does rely on Mercurial to understandably not want to figure out the hosting part, especially with limited resources, and with the mixed experience hosting both Mercurial and git has been so far. After all, GitHub couldn't even display things like the contributors' graph on gecko-dev until recently, and hosting is literally their job! They still drop the ball on large blames (thankfully we have searchfox for those). Where does that leave us? Gitlab? For those criticizing GitHub for being proprietary, that's probably not open enough. Cloud Source Repositories? "But GitHub is Microsoft" is a complaint I've read a lot after the announcement. Do you think Google hosting would have appealed to these people? Bitbucket? I'm kind of surprised it wasn't in the list of providers that were considered, but I'm also kind of glad it wasn't (and I'll leave it at that). I think the only relatively big hosting provider that could have made the people criticizing the choice of GitHub happy is Codeberg, but I hadn't even heard of it before it was mentioned in response to Mozilla's announcement. But really, with literal thousands of Mozilla repositories already on GitHub, with literal tens of millions repositories on the platform overall, the pragmatic in me can't deny that it's an attractive option (and I can't stress enough that I wasn't remotely close to the room where the discussion about what choice to make happened). "But it's a slippery slope". I can see that being a real concern. LLVM also moved its repository to GitHub (from a (I think) self-hosted Subversion server), and ended up moving off Bugzilla and Phabricator to GitHub issues and PRs four years later. As an occasional contributor to LLVM, I hate this move. I hate the GitHub review UI with a passion. At least, right now, GitHub PRs are not a viable option for Mozilla, for their lack of support for security related PRs, and the more general shortcomings in the review UI. That doesn't mean things won't change in the future, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. The move to Git has just been announced, and the migration has not even begun yet. Just because Mozilla is moving the Firefox repository to GitHub doesn't mean it's locked in forever or that all the eggs are going to be thrown into one basket. If bridges need to be crossed in the future, we'll see then. So, what's next? The official announcement said we're not expecting the migration to really begin until six months from now. I'll swim against the current here, and say this: the earlier you can switch to git, the earlier you'll find out what works and what doesn't work for you, whether you already know Git or not. While there is not one unique workflow, here's what I would recommend anyone who wants to take the leap off Mercurial right now:

• Make sure git is installed. Chances are you already have it.
• Install git-cinnabar where mach bootstrap would install it.

  $ mkdir -p ~/.mozbuild/git-cinnabar
  $ cd ~/.mozbuild/git-cinnabar
  $ curl -sOL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/glandium/git-cinnabar/master/download.py
  $ python3 download.py && rm download.py

• Add git-cinnabar to your PATH. Make sure to also set that wherever you keep your PATH up-to-date (.bashrc or wherever else).

  $ PATH=$PATH:$HOME/.mozbuild/git-cinnabar

• Enter your mozilla-central or mozilla-unified Mercurial working copy, we'll do an in-place conversion, so that you don't need to move your mozconfigs, objdirs and what not.
• Initialize the git repository from GitHub.

  $ git init
  $ git remote add origin https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev
  $ git remote update origin

• Switch to a Mercurial remote.

  $ git remote set-url origin hg::https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-unified
  $ git config --local remote.origin.cinnabar-refs bookmarks
  $ git remote update origin --prune

• Fetch your local Mercurial heads.

  $ git -c cinnabar.refs=heads fetch hg::$PWD refs/heads/default/*:refs/heads/hg/*

  This will create a bunch of hg/<sha1> local branches, not all relevant to you (some come from old branches on mozilla-central). Note that if you're using Mercurial MQ, this will not pull your queues, as they don't exist as heads in the Mercurial repo. You'd need to apply your queues one by one and run the command above for each of them.
  Or, if you have bookmarks for your local Mercurial work, you can use this instead:

  $ git -c cinnabar.refs=bookmarks fetch hg::$PWD refs/heads/*:refs/heads/hg/*

  This will create hg/<bookmark_name> branches.
• Now, make git know what commit your working tree is on.

  $ git reset $(git cinnabar hg2git $(hg log -r . -T ' node '))

  This will take a little moment because Git is going to scan all the files in the tree for the first time. On the other hand, it won't touch their content or timestamps, so if you had a build around, it will still be valid, and mach build won't rebuild anything it doesn't have to.

As there is no one-size-fits-all workflow, I won't tell you how to organize yourself from there. I'll just say this: if you know the Mercurial sha1s of your previous local work, you can create branches for them with:

$ git branch <branch_name> $(git cinnabar hg2git <hg_sha1>)

At this point, you should have everything available on the Git side, and you can remove the .hg directory. Or move it into some empty directory somewhere else, just in case. But don't leave it here, it will only confuse the tooling. Artifact builds WILL be confused, though, and you'll have to ./mach configure before being able to do anything. You may also hit bug 1865299 if your working tree is older than this post. If you have any problem or question, you can ping me on #git-cinnabar or #git on Matrix. I'll put the instructions above somewhere on wiki.mozilla.org, and we can collaboratively iterate on them. Now, what the announcement didn't say is that the Git repository WILL NOT be gecko-dev, doesn't exist yet, and WON'T BE COMPATIBLE (trust me, it'll be for the better). Why did I make you do all the above, you ask? Because that won't be a problem. I'll have you covered, I promise. The upcoming release of git-cinnabar 0.7.0-b1 will have a way to smoothly switch between gecko-dev and the future repository (incidentally, that will also allow to switch from a pure git-cinnabar clone to a gecko-dev one, for the git-cinnabar users who have kept reading this far). What about git-cinnabar? With Mercurial going the way of the dodo at Mozilla, my own need for git-cinnabar will vanish. Legitimately, this begs the question whether it will still be maintained. I can't answer for sure. I don't have a crystal ball. However, the needs of the transition itself will motivate me to finish some long-standing things (like finalizing the support for pushing merges, which is currently behind an experimental flag) or implement some missing features (support for creating Mercurial branches). Git-cinnabar started as a Python script, it grew a sidekick implemented in C, which then incorporated some Rust, which then cannibalized the Python script and took its place. It is now close to 90% Rust, and 10% C (if you don't count the code from Git that is statically linked to it), and has sort of become my Rust playground (it's also, I must admit, a mess, because of its history, but it's getting better). So the day to day use with Mercurial is not my sole motivation to keep developing it. If it were, it would stay stagnant, because all the features I need are there, and the speed is not all that bad, although I know it could be better. Arguably, though, git-cinnabar has been relatively stagnant feature-wise, because all the features I need are there. So, no, I don't expect git-cinnabar to die along Mercurial use at Mozilla, but I can't really promise anything either. Final words That was a long post. But there was a lot of ground to cover. And I still skipped over a bunch of things. I hope I didn't bore you to death. If I did and you're still reading... what's wrong with you? ;) So this is the end of Mercurial at Mozilla. So long, and thanks for all the fish. But this is also the beginning of a transition that is not easy, and that will not be without hiccups, I'm sure. So fasten your seatbelts (plural), and welcome the change. To circle back to the clickbait title, did I really kill Mercurial at Mozilla? Of course not. But it's like I stumbled upon a few sparks and tossed a can of gasoline on them. I didn't start the fire, but I sure made it into a proper bonfire... and now it has turned into a wildfire. And who knows? 15 years from now, someone else might be looking back at how Mozilla picked Git at the wrong time, and that, had we waited a little longer, we would have picked some yet to come new horse. But hey, that's the tech cycle for you.

Review: Thud!, by Terry Pratchett

Series:	Discworld #34
Publisher:	Harper
Copyright:	October 2005
Printing:	November 2014
ISBN:	0-06-233498-0
Format:	Mass market
Pages:	434

Thud! is the 34th Discworld novel and the seventh Watch novel. It is partly a sequel to The Fifth Elephant, partly a sequel to Night Watch, and references many of the previous Watch novels. This is not a good place to start. Dwarfs and trolls have a long history of conflict, as one might expect between a race of creatures who specialize in mining and a race of creatures whose vital organs are sometimes the targets of that mining. The first battle of Koom Valley was the place where that enmity was made concrete and given a symbol. Now that there are large dwarf and troll populations in Ankh-Morpork, the upcoming anniversary of that battle is the excuse for rising tensions. Worse, Grag Hamcrusher, a revered deep-down dwarf and a dwarf supremacist, is giving incendiary speeches about killing all trolls and appears to be tunneling under the city. Then whispers run through the city's dwarfs that Hamcrusher has been murdered by a troll. Vimes has no patience for racial tensions, or for the inspection of the Watch by one of Vetinari's excessively competent clerks, or the political pressure to add a vampire to the Watch over his prejudiced objections. He was already grumpy before the murder and is in absolutely no mood to be told by deep-down dwarfs who barely believe that humans exist that the murder of a dwarf underground is no affair of his. Meanwhile, The Battle of Koom Valley by Methodia Rascal has been stolen from the Ankh-Morpork Royal Art Museum, an impressive feat given that the painting is ten feet high and fifty feet long. It was painted in impressive detail by a madman who thought he was a chicken, and has been the spark for endless theories about clues to some great treasure or hidden knowledge, culminating in the conspiratorial book Koom Valley Codex. But the museum prides itself on allowing people to inspect and photograph the painting to their heart's content and was working on a new room to display it. It's not clear why someone would want to steal it, but Colon and Nobby are on the case. This was a good time to read this novel. Sadly, the same could be said of pretty much every year since it was written. "Thud" in the title is a reference to Hamcrusher's murder, which was supposedly done by a troll club that was found nearby, but it's also a reference to a board game that we first saw in passing in Going Postal. We find out a lot more about Thud in this book. It's an asymmetric two-player board game that simulates a stylized battle between dwarf and troll forces, with one player playing the trolls and the other playing the dwarfs. The obvious comparison is to chess, but a better comparison would be to the old Steve Jackson Games board game Ogre, which also featured asymmetric combat mechanics. (I'm sure there are many others.) This board game will become quite central to the plot of Thud! in ways that I thought were ingenious. I thought this was one of Pratchett's best-plotted books to date. There are a lot of things happening, involving essentially every member of the Watch that we've met in previous books, and they all matter and I was never confused by how they fit together. This book is full of little callbacks and apparently small things that become important later in a way that I found delightful to read, down to the children's book that Vimes reads to his son and that turns into the best scene of the book. At this point in my Discworld read-through, I can see why the Watch books are considered the best sub-series. It feels like Pratchett kicks the quality of writing up a notch when he has Vimes as a protagonist. In several books now, Pratchett has created a villain by taking some human characteristic and turning it into an external force that acts on humans. (See, for instance the Gonne in Men at Arms, or the hiver in A Hat Full of Sky.) I normally do not like this plot technique, both because I think it lets humans off the hook in a way that cheapens the story and because this type of belief has a long and bad reputation in religions where it is used to dodge personal responsibility and dehumanize one's enemies. When another of those villains turned up in this book, I was dubious. But I think Pratchett pulls off this type of villain as well here as I've seen it done. He lifts up a facet of humanity to let the reader get a better view, but somehow makes it explicit that this is concretized metaphor. This force is something people create and feed and choose and therefore are responsible for. The one sour note that I do have to complain about is that Pratchett resorts to some cheap and annoying "men are from Mars, women are from Venus" nonsense, mostly around Nobby's subplot but in a few other places (Sybil, some of Angua's internal monologue) as well. It's relatively minor, and I might let it pass without grumbling in other books, but usually Pratchett is better on gender than this. I expected better and it got under my skin. Otherwise, though, this was a quietly excellent book. It doesn't have the emotional gut punch of Night Watch, but the plotting is superb and the pacing is a significant improvement over The Fifth Elephant. The parody is of The Da Vinci Code, which is both more interesting than Pratchett's typical movie parodies and delightfully subtle. We get more of Sybil being a bad-ass, which I am always here for. There's even some lovely world-building in the form of dwarven Devices. I love how Pratchett has built Vimes up into one of the most deceptively heroic figures on Discworld, but also shows all of the support infrastructure that ensures Vimes maintain his principles. On the surface, Thud! has a lot in common with Vimes's insistently moral stance in Jingo, but here it is more obvious how Vimes's morality happens in part because his wife, his friends, and his boss create the conditions for it to thrive. Highly recommended to anyone who has gotten this far. Rating: 9 out of 10

Review: The Exiled Fleet, by J.S. Dewes

Series:	Divide #2
Publisher:	Tor
Copyright:	2021
ISBN:	1-250-23635-5
Format:	Kindle
Pages:	421

The Exiled Fleet is far-future interstellar military SF. It is a direct sequel to The Last Watch. You don't want to start here. The Last Watch took a while to get going, but it ended with some fascinating world-building and a suitably enormous threat. I was hoping Dewes would carry that momentum into the second book. I was disappointed; instead, The Exiled Fleet starts with interpersonal angst and wallowing and takes an annoyingly long time to build up narrative tension again. The world-building of the first book looked outward, towards aliens and strange technology and stranger physics, while setting up contributing problems on the home front. The Exiled Fleet pivots inwards, both in terms of world-building and in terms of character introspection. Neither of those worked as well for me. There's nothing wrong with the revelations here about human power structures and the politics that the Sentinels have been missing at the edge of space, but it also felt like a classic human autocracy without much new to offer in either wee thinky bits or plot structure. We knew most of shape from the start of the first book: Cavalon's grandfather is evil, human society is run as an oligarchy, and everything is trending authoritarian. Once the action started, I was entertained but not gripped the way that I was when reading The Last Watch. Dewes makes a brief attempt to tap into the morally complex question of the military serving as a brake on tyranny, but then does very little with it. Instead, everything is excessively personal, turning the political into less of a confrontation of ideologies or ethics and more a story of family abuse and rebellion. There is even more psychodrama in this book than there was in the previous book. I found it exhausting. Rake is barely functional after the events of the previous book and pushing herself way too hard at the start of this one. Cavalon regresses considerably and starts falling apart again. There's a lot of moping, a lot of angst, and a lot of characters berating themselves and occasionally each other. It was annoying enough that I took a couple of weeks break from this book in the middle before I could work up the enthusiasm to finish it. Some of this is personal preference. My favorite type of story is competence porn: details about something esoteric and satisfyingly complex, a challenge to overcome, and a main character who deploys their expertise to overcome that challenge in a way that shows they generally have their shit together. I can enjoy other types of stories, but that's the story I'll keep reaching for. Other people prefer stories about fuck-ups and walking disasters, people who barely pull together enough to survive the plot (or sometimes not even that). There's nothing wrong with that, and neither approach is right or wrong, but my tolerance for that story is usually lot lower. I think Dewes is heading towards the type of story in which dysfunctional characters compensate for each other's flaws in order to keep each other going, and intellectually I can see the appeal. But it's not my thing, and when the main characters are falling apart and the supporting characters project considerably more competence, I wish the story had different protagonists. It didn't help that this is in theory military SF, but Dewes does not seem to want to deploy any of the support framework of the military to address any of her characters' problems. This book is a lot of Rake and Cavalon dragging each other through emotional turmoil while coming to terms with Cavalon's family. I liked their dynamic in the first book when it felt more like Rake showing leadership skills. Here, it turns into something closer to found family in ways that seemed wildly inconsistent with the military structure, and while I'm normally not one to defend hierarchical discipline, I felt like Rake threw out the only structure she had to handle the thousands of other people under her command and started winging it based on personal friendship. If this were a small commercial crew, sure, fine, but Rake has a personal command responsibility that she obsessively angsts about and yet keeps abandoning. I realize this is probably another way to complain that I wanted competence porn and got barely-functional fuck-ups. The best parts of this series are the strange technologies and the aliens, and they are again the best part of this book. There was a truly great moment involving Viator technology that I found utterly delightful, and there was an intriguing setup for future books that caught my attention. Unfortunately, there were also a lot of deus ex machina solutions to problems, both from convenient undisclosed character backstories and from alien tech. I felt like the characters had to work satisfyingly hard for their victories in the first book; here, I felt like Dewes kept having issues with her characters being at point A and her plot at point B and pulling some rabbit out of the hat to make the plot work. This unfortunately undermined the cool factor of the world-building by making its plot device aspects a bit too obvious. This series also turns out not to be a duology (I have no idea why I thought it would be). By the end of The Exiled Fleet, none of the major political or world-building problems have been resolved. At best, the characters are in a more stable space to start being proactive. I'm cautiously optimistic that could mean the series would turn into the type of story I was hoping for, but I'm worried that Dewes is interested in writing a different type of character story than I am interested in reading. Hopefully there will be some clues in the synopsis of the (as yet unannounced) third book. I thought The Last Watch had some first-novel problems but was worth reading. I am much more reluctant to recommend The Exiled Fleet, or the series as a whole given that it is incomplete. Unless you like dysfunctional characters, proceed with caution. Rating: 5 out of 10

Like each month, have a look at the work funded by Freexian s Debian LTS offering.

Debian LTS contributors In October, 18 contributors have been paid to work on Debian LTS, their reports are available:

• Adrian Bunk did 8.0h (out of 7.75h assigned and 10.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 9.75h to the next month.
• Anton Gladky did 9.5h (out of 9.5h assigned and 5.5h from previous period), thus carrying over 5.5h to the next month.
• Bastien Roucari s did 16.0h (out of 16.75h assigned and 1.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 1.75h to the next month.
• Ben Hutchings did 8.0h (out of 17.75h assigned), thus carrying over 9.75h to the next month.
• Chris Lamb did 17.0h (out of 17.75h assigned), thus carrying over 0.75h to the next month.
• Emilio Pozuelo Monfort did 17.5h (out of 17.75h assigned), thus carrying over 0.25h to the next month.
• Guilhem Moulin did 9.75h (out of 17.75h assigned), thus carrying over 8.0h to the next month.
• Helmut Grohne did 1.5h (out of 10.0h assigned), thus carrying over 8.5h to the next month.
• Lee Garrett did 10.75h (out of 17.75h assigned), thus carrying over 7.0h to the next month.
• Markus Koschany did 30.0h (out of 30.0h assigned).
• Ola Lundqvist did 4.0h (out of 0h assigned and 19.5h from previous period), thus carrying over 15.5h to the next month.
• Roberto C. S nchez did 12.0h (out of 5.0h assigned and 7.0h from previous period).
• Santiago Ruano Rinc n did 13.625h (out of 7.75h assigned and 8.25h from previous period), thus carrying over 2.375h to the next month.
• Sean Whitton did 13.0h (out of 6.0h assigned and 7.0h from previous period).
• Sylvain Beucler did 7.5h (out of 11.25h assigned and 6.5h from previous period), thus carrying over 10.25h to the next month.
• Thorsten Alteholz did 14.0h (out of 14.0h assigned).
• Tobias Frost did 16.0h (out of 9.25h assigned and 6.75h from previous period).
• Utkarsh Gupta did 0.0h (out of 0.75h assigned and 17.0h from previous period), thus carrying over 17.75h to the next month.

Evolution of the situation In October, we have released 49 DLAs. Of particular note in the month of October, LTS contributor Chris Lamb issued DLA 3627-1 pertaining to Redis, the popular key-value database similar to Memcached, which was vulnerable to an authentication bypass vulnerability. Fixing this vulnerability involved dealing with a race condition that could allow another process an opportunity to establish an otherwise unauthorized connection. LTS contributor Markus Koschany was involved in the mitigation of CVE-2023-44487, which is a protocol-level vulnerability in the HTTP/2 protocol. The impacts within Debian involved multiple packages, across multiple releases, with multiple advisories being released (both DSA for stable and old-stable, and DLA for LTS). Markus reviewed patches and security updates prepared by other Debian developers, investigated reported regressions, provided patches for the aforementioned regressions, and issued several security updates as part of this. Additionally, as MariaDB 10.3 (the version originally included with Debian buster) passed end-of-life earlier this year, LTS contributor Emilio Pozuelo Monfort has begun investigating the feasibility of backporting MariaDB 10.11. The work is in early stages, with much testing and analysis remaining before a final decision can be made, as this only one of several available potential courses of action concerning MariaDB. Finally, LTS contributor Lee Garrett has invested considerable effort into the development the Functional Test Framework here. While so far only an initial version has been published, it already has several features which we intend to begin leveraging for testing of LTS packages. In particular, the FTF supports provisioning multiple VMs for the purposes of performing functional tests of network-facing services (e.g., file services, authentication, etc.). These tests are in addition to the various unit-level tests which are executed during package build time. Development work will continue on FTF and as it matures and begins to see wider use within LTS we expect to improve the quality of the updates we publish.

Thanks to our sponsors Sponsors that joined recently are in bold.

• Platinum sponsors:
  • TOSHIBA (for 98 months)
  • Civil Infrastructure Platform (CIP) (for 66 months)
• Gold sponsors:
  • Roche Diagnostics International AG (for 109 months)
  • Linode (for 103 months)
  • Babiel GmbH (for 92 months)
  • Plat Home (for 92 months)
  • University of Oxford (for 48 months)
  • Deveryware (for 35 months)
  • VyOS Inc (for 30 months)
  • EDF SA (for 19 months)
• Silver sponsors:
  • Domeneshop AS (for 113 months)
  • Nantes M tropole (for 107 months)
  • Univention GmbH (for 99 months)
  • Universit Jean Monnet de St Etienne (for 99 months)
  • Ribbon Communications, Inc. (for 93 months)
  • Exonet B.V. (for 83 months)
  • Leibniz Rechenzentrum (for 77 months)
  • CINECA (for 66 months)
  • Minist re de l Europe et des Affaires trang res (for 60 months)
  • Cloudways Ltd (for 50 months)
  • Dinahosting SL (for 48 months)
  • Bauer Xcel Media Deutschland KG (for 42 months)
  • Platform.sh (for 42 months)
  • Moxa Inc. (for 36 months)
  • sipgate GmbH (for 33 months)
  • OVH US LLC (for 31 months)
  • Tilburg University (for 31 months)
  • GSI Helmholtzzentrum f r Schwerionenforschung GmbH (for 23 months)
  • Soliton Systems K.K. (for 20 months)
• Bronze sponsors:
  • Evolix (for 114 months)
  • Seznam.cz, a.s. (for 114 months)
  • Intevation GmbH (for 111 months)
  • Linuxhotel GmbH (for 111 months)
  • Daevel SARL (for 109 months)
  • Bitfolk LTD (for 108 months)
  • Megaspace Internet Services GmbH (for 108 months)
  • Greenbone AG (for 107 months)
  • NUMLOG (for 107 months)
  • WinGo AG (for 107 months)
  • Ecole Centrale de Nantes - LHEEA (for 103 months)
  • Entr ouvert (for 98 months)
  • Adfinis AG (for 95 months)
  • GNI MEDIA (for 90 months)
  • Laboratoire LEGI - UMR 5519 / CNRS (for 90 months)
  • Tesorion (for 90 months)
  • Bearstech (for 81 months)
  • LiHAS (for 81 months)
  • Catalyst IT Ltd (for 76 months)
  • Supagro (for 71 months)
  • Demarcq SAS (for 70 months)
  • Universit Grenoble Alpes (for 56 months)
  • TouchWeb SAS (for 48 months)
  • SPiN AG (for 45 months)
  • CoreFiling (for 40 months)
  • Institut des sciences cognitives Marc Jeannerod (for 35 months)
  • Observatoire des Sciences de l Univers de Grenoble (for 32 months)
  • Tem Innovations GmbH (for 27 months)
  • WordFinder.pro (for 26 months)
  • CNRS DT INSU R sif (for 25 months)
  • Alter Way (for 18 months)
  • Institut Camille Jordan (for 7 months)

Until now, I haven't hacked my Kobo Libra 2 ereader, despite knowing it is a relatively open device. The default document reader (Nickel) does everything I need it to. Syncing the books via USB is tedious, but I don't do it that often. Via Videah's blog post My E-Reader Setup, I learned of Plato, an alternative document reader. Plato doesn't really offer any headline features that I need, but it cost me nothing to try it out, so I installed it (fairly painlessly) and launched it just once. The library view seems good, although I've not used it much: I picked a book and read it through¹, and I'm 60% through another². I tend to read one ebook at a time. The main reader interface is great: Just the text³. Page transitions are really, really fast. Tweaking the backlight intensity is a little slower than Nickel: menu-driven rather than an active scroll region (which is convenient in Nickel but easy to accidentally turn to 0% and hard to recover from in pitch black). Now that I've started down the road of hacking the Kobo, I think I will explore wifi-syncing the library, perhaps using a variation on the hook scripts shared in Videah's blog post.

TL;DR: This blog post explores the color capabilities of AMD hardware and how they are exposed to userspace through driver-specific properties. It discusses the different color blocks in the AMD Display Core Next (DCN) pipeline and their capabilities, such as predefined transfer functions, 1D and 3D lookup tables (LUTs), and color transformation matrices (CTMs). It also highlights the differences in AMD HW blocks for pre and post-blending adjustments, and how these differences are reflected in the available driver-specific properties. Overall, this blog post provides a comprehensive overview of the color capabilities of AMD hardware and how they can be controlled by userspace applications through driver-specific properties. This information is valuable for anyone who wants to develop applications that can take advantage of the AMD color management pipeline. Get a closer look at each hardware block s capabilities, unlock a wealth of knowledge about AMD display hardware, and enhance your understanding of graphics and visual computing. Stay tuned for future developments as we embark on a quest for GPU color capabilities in the ever-evolving realm of rainbow treasures.

---

Operating Systems can use the power of GPUs to ensure consistent color reproduction across graphics devices. We can use GPU-accelerated color management to manage the diversity of color profiles, do color transformations to convert between High-Dynamic-Range (HDR) and Standard-Dynamic-Range (SDR) content and color enhacements for wide color gamut (WCG). However, to make use of GPU display capabilities, we need an interface between userspace and the kernel display drivers that is currently absent in the Linux/DRM KMS API. In the previous blog post I presented how we are expanding the Linux/DRM color management API to expose specific properties of AMD hardware. Now, I ll guide you to the color features for the Linux/AMD display driver. We embark on a journey through DRM/KMS, AMD Display Manager, and AMD Display Core and delve into the color blocks to uncover the secrets of color manipulation within AMD hardware. Here we ll talk less about the color tools and more about where to find them in the hardware. We resort to driver-specific properties to reach AMD hardware blocks with color capabilities. These blocks display features like predefined transfer functions, color transformation matrices, and 1-dimensional (1D LUT) and 3-dimensional lookup tables (3D LUT). Here, we will understand how these color features are strategically placed into color blocks both before and after blending in Display Pipe and Plane (DPP) and Multiple Pipe/Plane Combined (MPC) blocks. That said, welcome back to the second part of our thrilling journey through AMD s color management realm!

AMD Display Driver in the Linux/DRM Subsystem: The Journey In my 2022 XDC talk I m not an AMD expert, but , I briefly explained the organizational structure of the Linux/AMD display driver where the driver code is bifurcated into a Linux-specific section and a shared-code portion. To reveal AMD s color secrets through the Linux kernel DRM API, our journey led us through these layers of the Linux/AMD display driver s software stack. It includes traversing the DRM/KMS framework, the AMD Display Manager (DM), and the AMD Display Core (DC) [1]. The DRM/KMS framework provides the atomic API for color management through KMS properties represented by struct drm_property. We extended the color management interface exposed to userspace by leveraging existing resources and connecting them with driver-specific functions for managing modeset properties. On the AMD DC layer, the interface with hardware color blocks is established. The AMD DC layer contains OS-agnostic components that are shared across different platforms, making it an invaluable resource. This layer already implements hardware programming and resource management, simplifying the external developer s task. While examining the DC code, we gain insights into the color pipeline and capabilities, even without direct access to specifications. Additionally, AMD developers provide essential support by answering queries and reviewing our work upstream. The primary challenge involved identifying and understanding relevant AMD DC code to configure each color block in the color pipeline. However, the ultimate goal was to bridge the DC color capabilities with the DRM API. For this, we changed the AMD DM, the OS-dependent layer connecting the DC interface to the DRM/KMS framework. We defined and managed driver-specific color properties, facilitated the transport of user space data to the DC, and translated DRM features and settings to the DC interface. Considerations were also made for differences in the color pipeline based on hardware capabilities.

Exploring Color Capabilities of the AMD display hardware Now, let s dive into the exciting realm of AMD color capabilities, where a abundance of techniques and tools await to make your colors look extraordinary across diverse devices. First, we need to know a little about the color transformation and calibration tools and techniques that you can find in different blocks of the AMD hardware. I borrowed some images from [2] [3] [4] to help you understand the information.

Predefined Transfer Functions (Named Fixed Curves): Transfer functions serve as the bridge between the digital and visual worlds, defining the mathematical relationship between digital color values and linear scene/display values and ensuring consistent color reproduction across different devices and media. You can learn more about curves in the chapter GPU Gems 3 - The Importance of Being Linear by Larry Gritz and Eugene d Eon. ITU-R 2100 introduces three main types of transfer functions:

• OETF: the opto-electronic transfer function, which converts linear scene light into the video signal, typically within a camera.
• EOTF: electro-optical transfer function, which converts the video signal into the linear light output of the display.
• OOTF: opto-optical transfer function, which has the role of applying the rendering intent .

AMD s display driver supports the following pre-defined transfer functions (aka named fixed curves):

• Linear/Unity: linear/identity relationship between pixel value and luminance value;
• Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4, Gamma 2.6: pure power functions;
• sRGB: 2.4: The piece-wise transfer function from IEC 61966-2-1:1999;
• BT.709: has a linear segment in the bottom part and then a power function with a 0.45 (~1/2.22) gamma for the rest of the range; standardized by ITU-R BT.709-6;
• PQ (Perceptual Quantizer): used for HDR display, allows luminance range capability of 0 to 10,000 nits; standardized by SMPTE ST 2084.

These capabilities vary depending on the hardware block, with some utilizing hardcoded curves and others relying on AMD s color module to construct curves from standardized coefficients. It also supports user/custom curves built from a lookup table.

1D LUTs (1-dimensional Lookup Table): A 1D LUT is a versatile tool, defining a one-dimensional color transformation based on a single parameter. It s very well explained by Jeremy Selan at GPU Gems 2 - Chapter 24 Using Lookup Tables to Accelerate Color Transformations It enables adjustments to color, brightness, and contrast, making it ideal for fine-tuning. In the Linux AMD display driver, the atomic API offers a 1D LUT with 4096 entries and 8-bit depth, while legacy gamma uses a size of 256.

3D LUTs (3-dimensional Lookup Table): These tables work in three dimensions red, green, and blue. They re perfect for complex color transformations and adjustments between color channels. It s also more complex to manage and require more computational resources. Jeremy also explains 3D LUT at GPU Gems 2 - Chapter 24 Using Lookup Tables to Accelerate Color Transformations

CTM (Color Transformation Matrices): Color transformation matrices facilitate the transition between different color spaces, playing a crucial role in color space conversion.

HDR Multiplier: HDR multiplier is a factor applied to the color values of an image to increase their overall brightness.

AMD Color Capabilities in the Hardware Pipeline First, let s take a closer look at the AMD Display Core Next hardware pipeline in the Linux kernel documentation for AMDGPU driver - Display Core Next In the AMD Display Core Next hardware pipeline, we encounter two hardware blocks with color capabilities: the Display Pipe and Plane (DPP) and the Multiple Pipe/Plane Combined (MPC). The DPP handles color adjustments per plane before blending, while the MPC engages in post-blending color adjustments. In short, we expect DPP color capabilities to match up with DRM plane properties, and MPC color capabilities to play nice with DRM CRTC properties. Note: here s the catch there are some DRM CRTC color transformations that don t have a corresponding AMD MPC color block, and vice versa. It s like a puzzle, and we re here to solve it!

AMD Color Blocks and Capabilities We can finally talk about the color capabilities of each AMD color block. As it varies based on the generation of hardware, let s take the DCN3+ family as reference. What s possible to do before and after blending depends on hardware capabilities describe in the kernel driver by struct dpp_color_caps and struct mpc_color_caps. The AMD Steam Deck hardware provides a tangible example of these capabilities. Therefore, we take SteamDeck/DCN301 driver as an example and look at the Color pipeline capabilities described in the file: driver/gpu/drm/amd/display/dcn301/dcn301_resources.c

/* Color pipeline capabilities */
dc->caps.color.dpp.dcn_arch = 1; // If it is a Display Core Next (DCN): yes. Zero means DCE.
dc->caps.color.dpp.input_lut_shared = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.icsc = 1; // Intput Color Space Conversion  (CSC) matrix.
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_ram = 0; // The old degamma block for degamma curve (hardcoded and LUT).  Gamma correction  is the new one.
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps.srgb = 1; // sRGB hardcoded curve support
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps.bt2020 = 1; // BT2020 hardcoded curve support (seems not actually in use)
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps.gamma2_2 = 1; // Gamma 2.2 hardcoded curve support
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps.pq = 1; // PQ hardcoded curve support
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps.hlg = 1; // HLG hardcoded curve support
dc->caps.color.dpp.post_csc = 1; // CSC matrix
dc->caps.color.dpp.gamma_corr = 1; // New  Gamma Correction  block for degamma user LUT;
dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_for_yuv = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.hw_3d_lut = 1; // 3D LUT support. If so, it's always preceded by a shaper curve. 
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_ram = 1; //  Blend Gamma  block for custom curve just after blending
// no OGAM ROM on DCN301
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_rom_caps.srgb = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_rom_caps.bt2020 = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_rom_caps.gamma2_2 = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_rom_caps.pq = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_rom_caps.hlg = 0;
dc->caps.color.dpp.ocsc = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.gamut_remap = 1; // Post-blending CTM (pre-blending CTM is always supported)
dc->caps.color.mpc.num_3dluts = pool->base.res_cap->num_mpc_3dlut; // Post-blending 3D LUT (preceded by shaper curve)
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_ram = 1; // Post-blending regamma.
// No pre-defined TF supported for regamma.
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_rom_caps.srgb = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_rom_caps.bt2020 = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_rom_caps.gamma2_2 = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_rom_caps.pq = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_rom_caps.hlg = 0;
dc->caps.color.mpc.ocsc = 1; // Output CSC matrix.

I included some inline comments in each element of the color caps to quickly describe them, but you can find the same information in the Linux kernel documentation. See more in struct dpp_color_caps, struct mpc_color_caps and struct rom_curve_caps. Now, using this guideline, we go through color capabilities of DPP and MPC blocks and talk more about mapping driver-specific properties to corresponding color blocks.

DPP Color Pipeline: Before Blending (Per Plane) Let s explore the capabilities of DPP blocks and what you can achieve with a color block. The very first thing to pay attention is the display architecture of the display hardware: previously AMD uses a display architecture called DCE

• Display and Compositing Engine, but newer hardware follows DCN - Display Core Next.

The architectute is described by: dc->caps.color.dpp.dcn_arch

AMD Plane Degamma: TF and 1D LUT Described by: dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_ram, dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps,dc->caps.color.dpp.gamma_corr AMD Plane Degamma data is mapped to the initial stage of the DPP pipeline. It is utilized to transition from scanout/encoded values to linear values for arithmetic operations. Plane Degamma supports both pre-defined transfer functions and 1D LUTs, depending on the hardware generation. DCN2 and older families handle both types of curve in the Degamma RAM block (dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_ram); DCN3+ separate hardcoded curves and 1D LUT into two block: Degamma ROM (dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_rom_caps) and Gamma correction block (dc->caps.color.dpp.gamma_corr), respectively. Pre-defined transfer functions:

• they are hardcoded curves (read-only memory - ROM);
• supported curves: sRGB EOTF, BT.709 inverse OETF, PQ EOTF and HLG OETF, Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4 and Gamma 2.6 EOTF.

The 1D LUT currently accepts 4096 entries of 8-bit. The data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements. Setting TF = Identity/Default and LUT as NULL means bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 04/32] drm/amd/display: add driver-specific property for plane degamma LUT
• [PATCH v3 05/32] drm/amd/display: add plane degamma TF driver-specific property
• [PATCH v3 19/32] drm/amd/display: add plane degamma TF and LUT support

AMD Plane 3x4 CTM (Color Transformation Matrix) AMD Plane CTM data goes to the DPP Gamut Remap block, supporting a 3x4 fixed point (s31.32) matrix for color space conversions. The data is interpreted as a struct drm_color_ctm_3x4. Setting NULL means bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 30/32] drm/amd/display: add plane CTM driver-specific property
• [PATCH v3 31/32] drm/amd/display: add plane CTM support
• [PATCH v3 32/32] drm/amd/display: Add 3x4 CTM support for plane CTM

AMD Plane Shaper: TF + 1D LUT Described by: dc->caps.color.dpp.hw_3d_lut The Shaper block fine-tunes color adjustments before applying the 3D LUT, optimizing the use of the limited entries in each dimension of the 3D LUT. On AMD hardware, a 3D LUT always means a preceding shaper 1D LUT used for delinearizing and/or normalizing the color space before applying a 3D LUT, so this entry on DPP color caps dc->caps.color.dpp.hw_3d_lut means support for both shaper 1D LUT and 3D LUT. Pre-defined transfer function enables delinearizing content with or without shaper LUT, where AMD color module calculates the resulted shaper curve. Shaper curves go from linear values to encoded values. If we are already in a non-linear space and/or don t need to normalize values, we can set a Identity TF for shaper that works similar to bypass and is also the default TF value. Pre-defined transfer functions:

• there is no DPP Shaper ROM. Curves are calculated by AMD color modules. Check calculate_curve() function in the file amd/display/modules/color/color_gamma.c.
• supported curves: Identity, sRGB inverse EOTF, BT.709 OETF, PQ inverse EOTF, HLG OETF, and Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4, Gamma 2.6 inverse EOTF.

The 1D LUT currently accepts 4096 entries of 8-bit. The data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements. When setting Plane Shaper TF (!= Identity) and LUT at the same time, the color module will combine the pre-defined TF and the custom LUT values into the LUT that s actually programmed. Setting TF = Identity/Default and LUT as NULL works as bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 10/32] drm/amd/display: add plane shaper LUT and TF
• [PATCH v3 23/32] drm/amd/display: add plane shaper LUT support
• [PATCH v3 24/32] drm/amd/display: add plane shaper TF support

AMD Plane 3D LUT Described by: dc->caps.color.dpp.hw_3d_lut The 3D LUT in the DPP block facilitates complex color transformations and adjustments. 3D LUT is a three-dimensional array where each element is an RGB triplet. As mentioned before, the dc->caps.color.dpp.hw_3d_lut describe if DPP 3D LUT is supported. The AMD driver-specific property advertise the size of a single dimension via LUT3D_SIZE property. Plane 3D LUT is a blog property where the data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements and the number of entries is LUT3D_SIZE cubic. The array contains samples from the approximated function. Values between samples are estimated by tetrahedral interpolation The array is accessed with three indices, one for each input dimension (color channel), blue being the outermost dimension, red the innermost. This distribution is better visualized when examining the code in [RFC PATCH 5/5] drm/amd/display: Fill 3D LUT from userspace by Alex Hung:

+	for (nib = 0; nib < 17; nib++)  
+		for (nig = 0; nig < 17; nig++)  
+			for (nir = 0; nir < 17; nir++)  
+				ind_lut = 3 * (nib + 17*nig + 289*nir);
+
+				rgb_area[ind].red = rgb_lib[ind_lut + 0];
+				rgb_area[ind].green = rgb_lib[ind_lut + 1];
+				rgb_area[ind].blue = rgb_lib[ind_lut + 2];
+				ind++;
+			 
+		 
+	 

In our driver-specific approach we opted to advertise it s behavior to the userspace instead of implicitly dealing with it in the kernel driver. AMD s hardware supports 3D LUTs with 17-size or 9-size (4913 and 729 entries respectively), and you can choose between 10-bit or 12-bit. In the current driver-specific work we focus on enabling only 17-size 12-bit 3D LUT, as in [PATCH v3 25/32] drm/amd/display: add plane 3D LUT support:

+		/* Stride and bit depth are not programmable by API yet.
+		 * Therefore, only supports 17x17x17 3D LUT (12-bit).
+		 */
+		lut->lut_3d.use_tetrahedral_9 = false;
+		lut->lut_3d.use_12bits = true;
+		lut->state.bits.initialized = 1;
+		__drm_3dlut_to_dc_3dlut(drm_lut, drm_lut3d_size, &lut->lut_3d,
+					lut->lut_3d.use_tetrahedral_9,
+					MAX_COLOR_3DLUT_BITDEPTH);

A refined control of 3D LUT parameters should go through a follow-up version or generic API. Setting 3D LUT to NULL means bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 09/32] drm/amd/display: add plane 3D LUT driver-specific properties
• [PATCH v3 25/32] drm/amd/display: add plane 3D LUT support

AMD Plane Blend/Out Gamma: TF + 1D LUT Described by: dc->caps.color.dpp.ogam_ram The Blend/Out Gamma block applies the final touch-up before blending, allowing users to linearize content after 3D LUT and just before the blending. It supports both 1D LUT and pre-defined TF. We can see Shaper and Blend LUTs as 1D LUTs that are sandwich the 3D LUT. So, if we don t need 3D LUT transformations, we may want to only use Degamma block to linearize and skip Shaper, 3D LUT and Blend. Pre-defined transfer function:

• there is no DPP Blend ROM. Curves are calculated by AMD color modules;
• supported curves: Identity, sRGB EOTF, BT.709 inverse OETF, PQ EOTF, HLG inverse OETF, and Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4, Gamma 2.6 EOTF.

The 1D LUT currently accepts 4096 entries of 8-bit. The data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements. If plane_blend_tf_property != Identity TF, AMD color module will combine the user LUT values with pre-defined TF into the LUT parameters to be programmed. Setting TF = Identity/Default and LUT to NULL means bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 11/32] drm/amd/display: add plane blend
• [PATCH v3 27/32] drm/amd/display: add plane blend LUT and TF support

MPC Color Pipeline: After Blending (Per CRTC)

DRM CRTC Degamma 1D LUT The degamma lookup table (LUT) for converting framebuffer pixel data before apply the color conversion matrix. The data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements. Setting NULL means bypass. Not really supported. The driver is currently reusing the DPP degamma LUT block (dc->caps.color.dpp.dgam_ram and dc->caps.color.dpp.gamma_corr) for supporting DRM CRTC Degamma LUT, as explaning by [PATCH v3 20/32] drm/amd/display: reject atomic commit if setting both plane and CRTC degamma.

DRM CRTC 3x3 CTM Described by: dc->caps.color.mpc.gamut_remap It sets the current transformation matrix (CTM) apply to pixel data after the lookup through the degamma LUT and before the lookup through the gamma LUT. The data is interpreted as a struct drm_color_ctm. Setting NULL means bypass.

DRM CRTC Gamma 1D LUT + AMD CRTC Gamma TF Described by: dc->caps.color.mpc.ogam_ram After all that, you might still want to convert the content to wire encoding. No worries, in addition to DRM CRTC 1D LUT, we ve got a AMD CRTC gamma transfer function (TF) to make it happen. Possible TF values are defined by enum amdgpu_transfer_function. Pre-defined transfer functions:

• there is no MPC Gamma ROM. Curves are calculated by AMD color modules.
• supported curves: Identity, sRGB inverse EOTF, BT.709 OETF, PQ inverse EOTF, HLG OETF, and Gamma 2.2, Gamma 2.4, Gamma 2.6 inverse EOTF.

The 1D LUT currently accepts 4096 entries of 8-bit. The data is interpreted as an array of struct drm_color_lut elements. When setting CRTC Gamma TF (!= Identity) and LUT at the same time, the color module will combine the pre-defined TF and the custom LUT values into the LUT that s actually programmed. Setting TF = Identity/Default and LUT to NULL means bypass. References:

• [PATCH v3 12/32] drm/amd/display: add CRTC gamma TF driver-specific property
• [PATCH v3 15/32] drm/amd/display: add CRTC gamma TF support

Others

AMD CRTC Shaper and 3D LUT We have previously worked on exposing CRTC shaper and CRTC 3D LUT, but they were removed from the AMD driver-specific color series because they lack userspace case. CRTC shaper and 3D LUT works similar to plane shaper and 3D LUT but after blending (MPC block). The difference here is that setting (not bypass) Shaper and Gamma blocks together are not expected, since both blocks are used to delinearize the input space. In summary, we either set Shaper + 3D LUT or Gamma.

Input and Output Color Space Conversion There are two other color capabilities of AMD display hardware that were integrated to DRM by previous works and worth a brief explanation here. The DC Input CSC sets pre-defined coefficients from the values of DRM plane color_range and color_encoding properties. It is used for color space conversion of the input content. On the other hand, we have de DC Output CSC (OCSC) sets pre-defined coefficients from DRM connector colorspace properties. It is uses for color space conversion of the composed image to the one supported by the sink. References:

• [PATCH] amd/display/dc: Fix COLOR_ENCODING and COLOR_RANGE doing nothing for DCN20+
• [PATCH v6 00/13] Enable Colorspace connector property in amdgpu

The search for rainbow treasures is not over yet If you want to understand a little more about this work, be sure to watch Joshua and I presented two talks at XDC 2023 about AMD/Steam Deck colors on Gamescope:

• The rainbow treasure map: advanced color management on Linux with AMD/Steam Deck
• Rainbow Frogs: HDR + Color Management in Gamescope/SteamOS

In the time between the first and second part of this blog post, Uma Shashank and Chaitanya Kumar Borah published the plane color pipeline for Intel and Harry Wentland implemented a generic API for DRM based on VKMS support. We discussed these two proposals and the next steps for Color on Linux during the Color Management workshop at XDC 2023 and I briefly shared workshop results in the 2023 XDC lightning talk session. The search for rainbow treasures is not over yet! We plan to meet again next year in the 2024 Display Hackfest in Coru a-Spain (Igalia s HQ) to keep up the pace and continue advancing today s display needs on Linux. Finally, a HUGE thank you to everyone who worked with me on exploring AMD s color capabilities and making them available in userspace.

FTP master This month I accepted 361 and rejected 34 packages. The overall number of packages that got accepted was 362. Debian LTS This was my hundred-twelfth month that I did some work for the Debian LTS initiative, started by Raphael Hertzog at Freexian. During my allocated time I uploaded:

• [DLA 3615-1] libcue security update for one CVE to fix an out-of-bounds array access
• [DLA 3631-1] xorg-server security update for two CVEs. These were embargoed issues related to privilege escalation
• [DLA 3633-1] gst-plugins-bad1.0 security update for three CVEs to fix possible DoS or arbitrary code execution when processing crafted media files.
• [1052361]bookworm-pu: the upload has been done and processed for the point release
• [1052363]bullseye-pu: the upload has been done and processed for the point release

Unfortunately upstream still could not resolve whether the patch for CVE-2023-42118 of libspf2 is valid, so no progress happened here.
I also continued to work on bind9 and try to understand why some tests fail. Last but not least I did some days of frontdesk duties and took part in the LTS meeting. Debian ELTS This month was the sixty-third ELTS month. During my allocated time I uploaded:

• [ELA-978-1]cups update in Jessie and Stretch for two CVEs. One issue is related to missing boundary checks which might lead to code execution when using crafted postscript documents. The other issue is related to unauthorized access to recently printed documents.
• [ELA-990-1]xorg-server update in Jessie and Stretch for two CVEs. These were embargoed issues related to privilege escalation.
• [ELA-993-1]gst-plugins-bad1.0 update in Jessie and Stretch for three CVEs to fix possible DoS or arbitrary code execution when processing crafted media files.

I also continued to work on bind9 and as with the version in LTS, I try to understand why some tests fail. Last but not least I did some days of frontdesk duties . Debian Printing This month I uploaded a new upstream version of:

• rlpr

Within the context of preserving old printing packages, I adopted:

• lprng

If you know of any other package that is also needed and still maintained by the QA team, please tell me. I also uploaded new upstream version of packages or uploaded a package to fix one or the other issue:

• cups
• hannah-foo2zjs

This work is generously funded by Freexian! Debian Mobcom This month I uploaded a package to fix one or the other issue:

• osmo-pcu The bug was filed by Helmut and was related to /usr-merge

Other stuff This month I uploaded new upstream version of packages, did a source upload for the transition or uploaded it to fix one or the other issue:

• dateutils
• libcds
• uucp