[PATCHv2 1/5] drm/exynos: add device tree support for rotator
Chanho Park
chanho61.park at samsusng.com
Sun Aug 11 19:48:48 PDT 2013
Hi Tomasz,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tomasz Figa [mailto:t.figa at samsung.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 9:51 PM
> To: Chanho Park
> Cc: inki.dae at samsung.com; kgene.kim at samsung.com; dri-
> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; kyungmin.park at samsung.com;
> mark.rutland at arm.com; l.stach at pengutronix.de; s.nawrocki at samsung.com;
> tomasz.figa at gmail.com; linux-samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel at lists.infradead.org; devicetree at vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/5] drm/exynos: add device tree support for
> rotator
>
> Hi Chanho,
>
> On Friday 09 of August 2013 16:40:49 Chanho Park wrote:
> > The exynos4 platform is only dt-based since 3.10, we should convert
> > driver data and ids to dt-based parsing methods. The rotator driver
> > has a limit table to get size limit of input picture. Each SoCs has
> > slightly different limit value compared with any others.
> > For example, exynos4210's max_size of RGB888 is 16k x 16k. But, others
> > have 8k x 8k. Another example the exynos5250 should have multiple of 2
> > pixel size for its X/Y axis. Thus, we should keep different tables for
> > each of them.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chanho Park <chanho61.park at samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park at samsung.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c | 109
> > ++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 28
> > deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c index 427640a..39b09e0
> > 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> > @@ -632,6 +632,73 @@ static int rotator_ippdrv_start(struct device
> > *dev, enum drm_exynos_ipp_cmd cmd) return 0; }
> >
> > +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_4210 = {
> > + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> > + .min_w = 32,
> > + .min_h = 32,
> > + .max_w = SZ_64K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_64K,
> > + .align = 3,
> > + },
> > + .rgb888 = {
> > + .min_w = 8,
> > + .min_h = 8,
> > + .max_w = SZ_16K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_16K,
> > + .align = 2,
> > + },
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_4x12 = {
> > + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> > + .min_w = 32,
> > + .min_h = 32,
> > + .max_w = SZ_32K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_32K,
> > + .align = 3,
> > + },
> > + .rgb888 = {
> > + .min_w = 8,
> > + .min_h = 8,
> > + .max_w = SZ_8K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_8K,
> > + .align = 2,
> > + },
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_5250 = {
> > + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> > + .min_w = 32,
> > + .min_h = 32,
> > + .max_w = SZ_32K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_32K,
> > + .align = 3,
> > + },
> > + .rgb888 = {
> > + .min_w = 8,
> > + .min_h = 8,
> > + .max_w = SZ_8K,
> > + .max_h = SZ_8K,
> > + .align = 1,
> > + },
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id exynos_rotator_match[] = {
> > + {
> > + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-rotator",
> > + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_4210,
> > + },
> > + {
> > + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-rotator",
> > + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_4x12,
> > + },
> > + {
> > + .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-rotator",
> > + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_5250,
> > + },
> > + {},
> > +};
> > +
> > static int rotator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) {
> > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > @@ -645,8 +712,19 @@ static int rotator_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev) return -ENOMEM;
> > }
> >
> > - rot->limit_tbl = (struct rot_limit_table *)
> > - platform_get_device_id(pdev)->driver_data;
> > + if (dev->of_node) {
> > + const struct of_device_id *match;
> > + match = of_match_node(of_match_ptr(exynos_rotator_match),
> > + dev->of_node);
> > + if (match == NULL) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "failed to match node\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
> > + rot->limit_tbl = (struct rot_limit_table *)match->data;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_err(dev, "cannot find binding\n");
>
> What about having a check for !dev->of_node at the beginning of probe,
> to not complicate further code?
I agree with your comment. I'll move it at the beginning.
>
> Also the error message is confusing. It should be something closer to
> "device does not have of_node".
I'll change it to avoid confusing. Thanks.
>
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
> >
> > rot->regs_res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > rot->regs = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, rot->regs_res); @@ -718,31
> > +796,6 @@ static int rotator_remove(struct platform_device
> > *pdev) return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl = {
> > - .ycbcr420_2p = {
> > - .min_w = 32,
> > - .min_h = 32,
> > - .max_w = SZ_32K,
> > - .max_h = SZ_32K,
> > - .align = 3,
> > - },
> > - .rgb888 = {
> > - .min_w = 8,
> > - .min_h = 8,
> > - .max_w = SZ_8K,
> > - .max_h = SZ_8K,
> > - .align = 2,
> > - },
> > -};
> > -
> > -static struct platform_device_id rotator_driver_ids[] = {
> > - {
> > - .name = "exynos-rot",
> > - .driver_data = (unsigned long)&rot_limit_tbl,
> > - },
> > - {},
> > -};
> > -
> > static int rotator_clk_crtl(struct rot_context *rot, bool enable) {
> > if (enable) {
> > @@ -804,10 +857,10 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops rotator_pm_ops =
> > { struct platform_driver rotator_driver = {
> > .probe = rotator_probe,
> > .remove = rotator_remove,
> > - .id_table = rotator_driver_ids,
> > .driver = {
> > .name = "exynos-rot",
> > .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > .pm = &rotator_pm_ops,
> > + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_rotator_match),
> > },
> > };
>
> Otherwise looks fine.
>
> One more thing is that IMHO patch 5/5 could be squashed with this one,
> so documentation for the binding would be available at the same it is
> introduced.
Yes. it seems to be better consolidating patch1 and 5.
I'll apply it to next patch.
Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list