[PATCH v2 1/2] drm: Add NVIDIA Tegra20 support

[Mark Zhang]

On 11/13/2012 05:37 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
> 
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 04:49:24PM +0800, Mark Zhang wrote:
>> On 11/13/2012 03:48 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>> Old Signed by an unknown key
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 03:15:47PM +0800, Mark Zhang wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/2012 05:55 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>>> This commit adds a KMS driver for the Tegra20 SoC. This includes basic
>>>>> support for host1x and the two display controllers found on the Tegra20
>>>>> SoC. Each display controller can drive a separate RGB/LVDS output.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at avionic-design.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>> - drop Linux-specific drm subdirectory for DT bindings documentation
>>>>> - remove display helper leftovers that belong in a later patch
>>>>> - reuse debugfs infrastructure provided by the DRM core
>>>>> - move vblank syncpoint defines to dc.h
>>>>> - use drm_compat_ioctl()
>>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/Kconfig
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..be1daf7
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
>>>>> +config DRM_TEGRA
>>>>> +       tristate "NVIDIA Tegra DRM"
>>>>> +       depends on DRM && OF && ARCH_TEGRA
>>>>> +       select DRM_KMS_HELPER
>>>>> +       select DRM_GEM_CMA_HELPER
>>>>> +       select DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER
>>>>
>>>> Just for curious, according to my testing, why the "CONFIG_CMA" is not
>>>> enabled while DRM_GEM_CMA_HELPER & DRM_KMS_CMA_HELPER are enabled here?
>>>
>>> The reason is that CMA doesn't actually provide any API for drivers to
>>> use and in fact unless you use very large buffers you could indeed run
>>> this code on top of a non-CMA kernel and it will likely even work.
>>>
>>
>> Okay. But I think it's better to turn on CMA defaultly. During my
>> testing, it's hard to allocate more 2MB without CMA...
> 
> CMA is enabled by default in one of the Tegra default configuration
> patches in my tegra/next branch. I will submit that patch to Stephen
> when the 3.8 cycle starts, so that it'll be automatically enabled along
> with the DRM driver.
> 
> But I don't think it makes sense to couple it to the DRM_TEGRA symbol as
> it isn't strictly required.
> 

Yes. We don't need to touch CMA in our Kconfig. In my opinion, right now
we're relying on the DRM_GEM_CMA_HELPER which should turn on CMA when
it's been selected.

>>>>> +static struct of_device_id tegra_dc_of_match[] = {
>>>>> +       { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-dc", },
>>>>> +       { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-dc", },
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want add Tegra 3 support in this patch set, remove
>>>> { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-dc", } here.
>>>
>>> Good catch! I'll move that into the Tegra30 support patch.
>>>
>>>>> +static int host1x_activate_drm_client(struct host1x *host1x,
>>>>> +                                     struct host1x_drm_client *drm,
>>>>> +                                     struct host1x_client *client)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +       mutex_lock(&host1x->drm_clients_lock);
>>>>> +       list_del_init(&drm->list);
>>>>> +       list_add_tail(&drm->list, &host1x->drm_active);
>>>>
>>>> Why we need this "drm_active" list? We can combine this function and
>>>> function "host1x_remove_drm_client" and free the drm client just here.
>>>> It's useless after host1x clients registered themselves.
>>>
>>> The list is used to properly remove all clients and resources when the
>>> module is unloaded. Granted, this code isn't executed if you don't build
>>> the driver as a loadable module, but it should still be a supported use-
>>> case.
>>>
>>
>> My opinion is, after registration is completed, host1x_drm_client is
>> useless, host1x_client is enough for follow-up operations.
>> I still don't get how this is related with building the driver into the
>> kernel or as a kernel module, so if something I misunderstood, please
>> let me know it. Thanks.
> 
> I can take another look at this and see if it can be further simplified.
> This was actually a rather tricky part to get right, so I'm naturally a
> bit hesitant to touch it.
> 

Okay. I recall I did some changes on this part about 3 month ago in a
patch named "drm: Add T30 support - host1x". So maybe you can know what
I mean by reading that patch.

> Thierry
> 
> * Unknown Key
> * 0x7F3EB3A1
>