Tegra DRM device tree bindings

[Thierry Reding]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:10:42PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/26/2012 04:55 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > while I haven't got much time to work on the actual code right now, I
> > think it might still be useful if we could get the device tree binding
> > to a point where everybody is happy with it. That'll also save me some
> > time once I get to writing the code because I won't have to redo it over
> > again. =)
> > 
> > So here's the current proposal:
> > 
> > 	host1x {
> > 		compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-host1x", "simple-bus";
> > 		reg = <0x50000000 0x00024000>;
> > 		interrupts = <0 64 0x04   /* cop syncpt */
> > 			      0 65 0x04   /* mpcore syncpt */
> > 			      0 66 0x04   /* cop general */
> > 			      0 67 0x04>; /* mpcore general */
> > 
> > 		#address-cells = <1>;
> > 		#size-cells = <1>;
> > 
> > 		ranges = <0x54000000 0x54000000 0x04000000>;
> > 
> > 		status = "disabled";
> 
> The idea behind status="disabled" is that some HW only makes sense to
> use on particular boards. This concept really only applies to HW modules
> that drive external interfaces on the SoC, which in turn the board can
> choose whether to connect anything to (or whether to even connect to any
> external pins using the pinmux, or not).
> 
> As such, I don't think it makes sense to set status="disabled" on
> host1x, nor many other internal-only engines such as say mpe, epp, i2sp,
> gr2d, gr3d, dc1, dc2.

What about power management and resource usage? If a board for instance
doesn't need gr3d at all it could just leave it at status = "disabled"
to not have the corresponding driver loaded and not waste the power and
resources.

> 
> However it does make sense for the output resources rgb, hdmi, tvo, dsi.
> 
> > 		/* outputs */
> > 		rgb {
> > 			compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-rgb";
> > 			status = "disabled";
> > 		};
> ...
> > The rgb node is something that I don't quite know how to handle yet.
> > Since it is really part of the display controller and uses its register
> > space, it isn't quite correct to represent it as a separate device. But
> > we will need a separate node to make it available as a connector, which
> > will become more obvious below.
> 
> Are you referring to the DC_COM_PIN_OUTPUT* registers? Sorry, I'm not at
> all familiar with our display HW yet.
> 
> Some possible solutions spring to mind:
> 
> a) The output nodes don't have to be direct children of host1x. Instead,
> each DC could have an rgb child node that represents its own individual
> output capability.

Yes, that idea had sprung to my mind as well. I rather like it, too.

> b) If the RGB-related registers in DC are completely independent of any
> other DC registers and grouped together well enough, we can just carve a
> chunk out of the DC register space and give that to the RGB node instead:
> 
> i.e. not:
> 
> > 		dc1: dc at 54200000 {
> > 			compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-dc";
> > 			reg = <0x54200000 0x00040000>;
> > 			interrupts = <0 73 0x04>;
> > 			status = "disabled";
> > 		};
> 
> 
> but something more like (the completely made up example):
> 
>     dc1: dc at 54200000 {
>         compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-dc";
>         reg = <0x54200000 0x00020000 0x54203000 0x10000>;
>         interrupts = <0 73 0x04>;
>         status = "disabled";
>     };
> 
>     rgb {
>         compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-rgb";
>         reg = <0x54220000 0x00010000>;
>         status = "disabled";
>     };
> 
> c) The rgb node could simply reference the dc nodes using a phandle, and
> call into the dc driver to obtain RGB configuration services from it:
> 
>     rgb {
>         compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-rgb";
>         status = "disabled";
>         nvidia,dcs = <&dc1 &dc2>;
>     };
> 
> By the way, if the RGB registers are in the DC, aren't there two
> separate RGB outputs. Certainly the TRM implies that both DCs can be
> driving LCDs, by reducing the width of the LCD signals that each DC uses
> (lower bits-per-pixel, or perhaps DDR encoding on the data lines).

Yes, there are two RGB outputs. Using alternative a) above should be
able to represent this quite well.

> > Board DTS files could then extend this with board-specific requirements
> > and connectors. The following describes the Medcom Wide:
> 
> > 	connectors {
> > 		#address-cells = <1>;
> > 		#size-cells = <0>;
> > 
> > 	};
> 
> The connector seems to be a property of the individual output resources.
> I'd expect to see the connector configuration be a child of the outputs
> that a particular board had enabled; something more like:
> 
>     host1x {
>         rgb {
>             status = "okay";
> 
>             connector at 0 {
>                 nvidia,edid = /incbin/("tegra-medcom.edid");
>             };
>         };
>         hdmi {
>             status = "okay";
> 
>             connector at 0 {
>                 nvidia,ddc-i2c-bus = <&tegra_i2c1>;
>             };
>         };
>     };
> 
> Perhaps even completely omit the connector node, and put the properties
> directly within the rgb/hdmi node itself. After all the HDMI output
> really is the connector as far as Tegra goes.

Heh. I seem to remember you objecting to this in a previous series[0]
which is actually the reason that I moved them to the top-level in the
first place. =)

Thierry

[0]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-tegra/msg05298.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20120626/94c04387/attachment-0001.pgp>