[PATCH RFT v1 3/3] drm/panfrost: Use the mali-supply regulator for control again

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Steven,

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 6:10 PM Steven Price <steven.price at arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/01/2020 17:27, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:31 PM Steven Price <steven.price at arm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 07/01/2020 23:06, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>> dev_pm_opp_set_rate() needs a reference to the regulator which should be
> >>> updated when updating the GPU frequency. The name of the regulator has
> >>> to be passed at initialization-time using dev_pm_opp_set_regulators().
> >>> Add the call to dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() so dev_pm_opp_set_rate()
> >>> will update the GPU regulator when updating the frequency (just like
> >>> we did this manually before when we open-coded dev_pm_opp_set_rate()).
> >>
> >> This patch causes a warning from debugfs on my firefly (RK3288) board:
> >>
> >> debugfs: Directory 'ffa30000.gpu-mali' with parent 'vdd_gpu' already
> >> present!
> >>
> >> So it looks like the regulator is being added twice - but I haven't
> >> investigated further.
> > I *think* it's because the regulator is already fetched by the
> > panfrost driver itself to enable it
> > (the devfreq code currently does not support enabling the regulator,
> > it can only control the voltage)
> >
> > I'm not sure what to do about this though
>
> Having a little play around with this, I think you can simply remove the
> panfrost_regulator_init() call. This at least works for me - the call to
> dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() seems to set everything up. However I
> suspect you need to do this unconditionally even if there are no
> operating points defined.
I'm not sure if I can safely remove panfrost_regulator_init() because
it calls regulator_enable()
but there's no regulator_enable() equivalent in devfreq or OPP

I'm not sure how this is supposed to work
if someone has an idea: please let me know

> > [...]
> >>>       ret = dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(dev);
> >>> -     if (ret)
> >>> +     if (ret) {
> >>> +             dev_pm_opp_put_regulators(pfdev->devfreq.regulators_opp_table);
> >>
> >> If we don't have a regulator then regulators_opp_table will be NULL and
> >> sadly dev_pm_opp_put_regulators() doesn't handle a NULL argument. The
> >> same applies to the two below calls obviously.
> > good catch, thank you!
> > are you happy with the general approach here or do you think that
> > dev_pm_opp_set_regulators is the wrong way to go (for whatever
> > reason)?
>
> To be honest this is an area I still don't fully understand. There's a
> lot of magic helper functions and very little in the way of helpful
> documentation to work out which are the right ones to call. It seems
> reasonable to me, hopefully someone more in the know will chime in it
> there's something fundamentally wrong!
OK, if you know anybody who could help then please Cc them


Martin