[RFC v2 PATCH 08/14] drm/exynos: dsi: add driver data to support Exynos5420
YoungJun Cho
yj44.cho at samsung.com
Wed Apr 23 18:23:26 PDT 2014
Hi Andrzej,
Thank you for comments.
On 04/23/2014 05:29 PM, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> On 04/21/2014 02:28 PM, YoungJun Cho wrote:
>> The offset of register DSIM_PLLTMR_REG in Exynos5420 is different
>> from the one in Exynos4 SoC.
>>
>> In case of Exynos5420 SoC, there is no frequency band bit in DSIM_PLLCTRL_REG,
>> and it uses DSIM_PHYCTRL_REG and DSIM_PHYTIMING*_REG instead.
>> So this patch adds driver data to distinguish it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: YoungJun Cho <yj44.cho at samsung.com>
>> Acked-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae at samsung.com>
>> Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park at samsung.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
>> index 179f2fa..fcd577f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>
>> #include <linux/clk.h>
>> #include <linux/irq.h>
>> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>> #include <linux/phy/phy.h>
>> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>>
>> @@ -54,9 +55,12 @@
>>
>> /* FIFO memory AC characteristic register */
>> #define DSIM_PLLCTRL_REG 0x4c /* PLL control register */
>> -#define DSIM_PLLTMR_REG 0x50 /* PLL timer register */
>> #define DSIM_PHYACCHR_REG 0x54 /* D-PHY AC characteristic register */
>> #define DSIM_PHYACCHR1_REG 0x58 /* D-PHY AC characteristic register1 */
>> +#define DSIM_PHYCTRL_REG 0x5c
>> +#define DSIM_PHYTIMING_REG 0x64
>> +#define DSIM_PHYTIMING1_REG 0x68
>> +#define DSIM_PHYTIMING2_REG 0x6c
>>
>> /* DSIM_STATUS */
>> #define DSIM_STOP_STATE_DAT(x) (((x) & 0xf) << 0)
>> @@ -233,6 +237,12 @@ struct exynos_dsi_transfer {
>> #define DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED BIT(1)
>> #define DSIM_STATE_CMD_LPM BIT(2)
>>
>> +struct exynos_dsi_driver_data {
>> + unsigned int plltmr_reg;
>> +
>> + unsigned int has_freqband:1;
>> +};
>> +
>> struct exynos_dsi {
>> struct mipi_dsi_host dsi_host;
>> struct drm_connector connector;
>> @@ -262,11 +272,39 @@ struct exynos_dsi {
>>
>> spinlock_t transfer_lock; /* protects transfer_list */
>> struct list_head transfer_list;
>> +
>> + struct exynos_dsi_driver_data *driver_data;
>> };
>>
>> #define host_to_dsi(host) container_of(host, struct exynos_dsi, dsi_host)
>> #define connector_to_dsi(c) container_of(c, struct exynos_dsi, connector)
>>
>> +static struct exynos_dsi_driver_data exynos4_dsi_driver_data = {
>> + .plltmr_reg = 0x50,
>> + .has_freqband = 1,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct exynos_dsi_driver_data exynos5_dsi_driver_data = {
>> + .plltmr_reg = 0x58,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct of_device_id exynos_dsi_of_match[] = {
>> + { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-mipi-dsi",
>> + .data = &exynos4_dsi_driver_data },
>> + { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-mipi-dsi",
>> + .data = &exynos5_dsi_driver_data },
>> + { }
>> +};
>
> I wonder if it wouldn't be better to use "samsung,exynos5410-mipi-dsi"
> compatible and distinguish 5410 and 5420 by DSIM_VERSION register.
>
That's because I have only Exynos5420 SoC based target,
so made DT for that and tested it only.
But it seems to be no problem to use exynos5410 compatible at least
for the dsi device :).
I'll try.
>
>> +
>> +static inline struct exynos_dsi_driver_data *exynos_dsi_get_driver_data(
>> + struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + const struct of_device_id *of_id =
>> + of_match_device(exynos_dsi_of_match, &pdev->dev);
>> +
>> + return (struct exynos_dsi_driver_data *)of_id->data;
>> +}
>> +
>> static void exynos_dsi_wait_for_reset(struct exynos_dsi *dsi)
>> {
>> if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&dsi->completed, msecs_to_jiffies(300)))
>> @@ -340,14 +378,9 @@ static unsigned long exynos_dsi_pll_find_pms(struct exynos_dsi *dsi,
>> static unsigned long exynos_dsi_set_pll(struct exynos_dsi *dsi,
>> unsigned long freq)
>> {
>> - static const unsigned long freq_bands[] = {
>> - 100 * MHZ, 120 * MHZ, 160 * MHZ, 200 * MHZ,
>> - 270 * MHZ, 320 * MHZ, 390 * MHZ, 450 * MHZ,
>> - 510 * MHZ, 560 * MHZ, 640 * MHZ, 690 * MHZ,
>> - 770 * MHZ, 870 * MHZ, 950 * MHZ,
>> - };
>> + struct exynos_dsi_driver_data *driver_data = dsi->driver_data;
>> unsigned long fin, fout;
>> - int timeout, band;
>> + int timeout;
>> u8 p, s;
>> u16 m;
>> u32 reg;
>> @@ -368,18 +401,30 @@ static unsigned long exynos_dsi_set_pll(struct exynos_dsi *dsi,
>> "failed to find PLL PMS for requested frequency\n");
>> return -EFAULT;
>> }
>> + dev_dbg(dsi->dev, "PLL freq %lu, (p %d, m %d, s %d)\n", fout, p, m, s);
>>
>> - for (band = 0; band < ARRAY_SIZE(freq_bands); ++band)
>> - if (fout < freq_bands[band])
>> - break;
>> + writel(500, dsi->reg_base + driver_data->plltmr_reg);
>> +
>> + reg = DSIM_PLL_EN | DSIM_PLL_P(p) | DSIM_PLL_M(m) | DSIM_PLL_S(s);
>> +
>> + if (driver_data->has_freqband) {
>> + static const unsigned long freq_bands[] = {
>> + 100 * MHZ, 120 * MHZ, 160 * MHZ, 200 * MHZ,
>> + 270 * MHZ, 320 * MHZ, 390 * MHZ, 450 * MHZ,
>> + 510 * MHZ, 560 * MHZ, 640 * MHZ, 690 * MHZ,
>> + 770 * MHZ, 870 * MHZ, 950 * MHZ,
>> + };
>> + int band;
>>
>> - dev_dbg(dsi->dev, "PLL freq %lu, (p %d, m %d, s %d), band %d\n", fout,
>> - p, m, s, band);
>> + for (band = 0; band < ARRAY_SIZE(freq_bands); ++band)
>> + if (fout < freq_bands[band])
>> + break;
>>
>> - writel(500, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PLLTMR_REG);
>> + dev_dbg(dsi->dev, "band %d\n", band);
>> +
>> + reg |= DSIM_FREQ_BAND(band);
>> + }
>>
>> - reg = DSIM_FREQ_BAND(band) | DSIM_PLL_EN
>> - | DSIM_PLL_P(p) | DSIM_PLL_M(m) | DSIM_PLL_S(s);
>> writel(reg, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PLLCTRL_REG);
>>
>> timeout = 1000;
>> @@ -391,6 +436,24 @@ static unsigned long exynos_dsi_set_pll(struct exynos_dsi *dsi,
>> reg = readl(dsi->reg_base + DSIM_STATUS_REG);
>> } while ((reg & DSIM_PLL_STABLE) == 0);
>>
>> + if (!driver_data->has_freqband) {
>
> Could you explain why lack of freqband determines necessity of setting PHY
> registers, is this a kind of hardware setting dependency?
Yes, there is H/W dependency.
In Exynos4 SoCs, from 24th to 26th bits of DSIM_PLLCTRL register are
for frequency band.
But in Exynos5410 / 5420 SoCs, those bits are used for DpDnSwap relevant
things.
So PHY ctrl and timing registers are required instead for it.
>
>> + /* b dphy ctrl */
>> + reg = 0x0af & 0x1ff;
>> + writel(reg, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PHYCTRL_REG);
>> +
>> + /* phy timing */
>> + reg = 0x06 << 8 | 0x0b;
>> + writel(reg, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PHYTIMING_REG);
>> +
>> + /* phy timing 1 */
>> + reg = 0x07 << 24 | 0x27 << 16 | 0x0d << 8 | 0x08;
>> + writel(reg, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PHYTIMING1_REG);
>> +
>> + /* phy timing 2 */
>> + reg = 0x09 << 16 | 0x0d << 8 | 0x0b;
>> + writel(reg, dsi->reg_base + DSIM_PHYTIMING2_REG);
>> + }
>> +
>
> Please use macros if possible instead of magic numbers.
Right, I'll fix.
>
> As I wrote in comment for earlier patch it would be better to separate
> setting PHY registers
> from clock registers.
>
Ok, I'll implement new function
and call it just after exynos_dsi_wait_for_reset().
Thank you.
Best regards YJ
>> return fout;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1412,6 +1475,7 @@ static int exynos_dsi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> dsi->dsi_host.dev = &pdev->dev;
>>
>> dsi->dev = &pdev->dev;
>> + dsi->driver_data = exynos_dsi_get_driver_data(pdev);
>>
>> ret = exynos_dsi_parse_dt(dsi);
>> if (ret)
>> @@ -1516,11 +1580,6 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos_dsi_pm_ops = {
>> SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(exynos_dsi_suspend, exynos_dsi_resume)
>> };
>>
>> -static struct of_device_id exynos_dsi_of_match[] = {
>> - { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-mipi-dsi" },
>> - { }
>> -};
>> -
>> struct platform_driver dsi_driver = {
>> .probe = exynos_dsi_probe,
>> .remove = exynos_dsi_remove,
>
>
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list