SF: Min layers should not choose a frame rate override
Due to b/266444890, we need to limit the frame rate override usages
for Min layers (such as infrequent layers) as it creates jank for layers
that just started to animate due to the slow ramp up time.
Bug: 266444890
Test: [v2/android-crystalball-eng/health/microbench/systemui/main/systemui-notification-1-jank-suite] android.platform.test.scenario.notification.ConversationNotificationMicrobenchmark#conversationNotificationTest
Change-Id: Ic42e00a6920b19cc6e972a13c4df54f73a55e1d7
diff --git a/services/surfaceflinger/Scheduler/RefreshRateSelector.cpp b/services/surfaceflinger/Scheduler/RefreshRateSelector.cpp
index 30821d8..1d27cfc 100644
--- a/services/surfaceflinger/Scheduler/RefreshRateSelector.cpp
+++ b/services/surfaceflinger/Scheduler/RefreshRateSelector.cpp
@@ -932,14 +932,22 @@
const char* const whence = __func__;
std::deque<ScoredFrameRate> ranking;
const auto rankFrameRate = [&](const FrameRateMode& frameRateMode) REQUIRES(mLock) {
+ using fps_approx_ops::operator<;
const auto& modePtr = frameRateMode.modePtr;
if (anchorGroupOpt && modePtr->getGroup() != anchorGroupOpt) {
return;
}
+ const bool ascending = (refreshRateOrder == RefreshRateOrder::Ascending);
+ if (ascending && frameRateMode.fps < getMinRefreshRateByPolicyLocked()->getFps()) {
+ // TODO(b/266481656): Once this bug is fixed, we can remove this workaround and actually
+ // use a lower frame rate when we want Ascending frame rates.
+ return;
+ }
+
float score = calculateDistanceScoreFromMax(frameRateMode.fps);
- const bool inverseScore = (refreshRateOrder == RefreshRateOrder::Ascending);
- if (inverseScore) {
+
+ if (ascending) {
score = 1.0f / score;
}
if (preferredDisplayModeOpt) {
@@ -951,6 +959,7 @@
constexpr float kNonPreferredModePenalty = 0.95f;
score *= kNonPreferredModePenalty;
}
+
ALOGV("%s(%s) %s (%s) scored %.2f", whence, ftl::enum_string(refreshRateOrder).c_str(),
to_string(frameRateMode.fps).c_str(), to_string(modePtr->getFps()).c_str(), score);
ranking.emplace_back(ScoredFrameRate{frameRateMode, score});
diff --git a/services/surfaceflinger/tests/unittests/RefreshRateSelectorTest.cpp b/services/surfaceflinger/tests/unittests/RefreshRateSelectorTest.cpp
index 06f45f9..5fddda5 100644
--- a/services/surfaceflinger/tests/unittests/RefreshRateSelectorTest.cpp
+++ b/services/surfaceflinger/tests/unittests/RefreshRateSelectorTest.cpp
@@ -2973,5 +2973,15 @@
EXPECT_EQ(kMode1, selector.getMinRefreshRateByPolicy());
}
+// TODO(b/266481656): Once this bug is fixed, we can remove this test
+TEST_P(RefreshRateSelectorTest, noLowerFrameRateOnMinVote) {
+ auto selector = createSelector(kModes_60_90, kModeId60);
+
+ std::vector<LayerRequirement> layers = {{.weight = 1.f}};
+ layers[0].name = "Test layer";
+ layers[0].vote = LayerVoteType::Min;
+ EXPECT_FRAME_RATE_MODE(kMode60, 60_Hz, selector.getBestScoredFrameRate(layers).frameRateMode);
+}
+
} // namespace
} // namespace android::scheduler