[Freedreno] [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/msm/dpu: Add SC8180x to hw catalog

Abhinav Kumar quic_abhinavk at quicinc.com
Wed Feb 16 07:19:55 UTC 2022 


On 2/15/2022 9:14 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 15 Feb 20:38 CST 2022, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 2/15/2022 6:14 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Tue 15 Feb 11:42 CST 2022, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/15/2022 9:28 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>>>> On Tue 15 Feb 11:14 CST 2022, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/14/2022 8:33 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Rob Clark <robdclark at chromium.org>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Add SC8180x to the hardware catalog, for initial support for the
>>>>>>> platform. Due to limitations in the DP driver only one of the four DP
>>>>>>> interfaces is left enabled.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The SC8180x platform supports the newly added DPU_INTF_WIDEBUS flag and
>>>>>>> the Windows-on-Snapdragon bootloader leaves the widebus bit set, so this
>>>>>>> is flagged appropriately to ensure widebus is disabled - for now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark at chromium.org>
>>>>>>> [bjorn: Reworked intf and irq definitions]
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson at linaro.org>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Changes since v1:
>>>>>>> - Dropped widebus flag
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c    | 129 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>      .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.h    |   1 +
>>>>>>>      drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c       |   1 +
>>>>>>>      drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c                 |   1 +
>>>>>>>      4 files changed, 132 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>>>>>>> index aa75991903a6..7ac0fe32df49 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>>>>>>> @@ -90,6 +90,17 @@
>>>>>>>      			 BIT(MDP_INTF3_INTR) | \
>>>>>>>      			 BIT(MDP_INTF4_INTR))
>>>>>>> +#define IRQ_SC8180X_MASK (BIT(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_HIST_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF0_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF1_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF2_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF3_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF4_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_INTF5_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_AD4_0_INTR) | \
>>>>>>> +			  BIT(MDP_AD4_1_INTR))
>>>>>>>      #define DEFAULT_PIXEL_RAM_SIZE		(50 * 1024)
>>>>>>>      #define DEFAULT_DPU_LINE_WIDTH		2048
>>>>>>> @@ -225,6 +236,22 @@ static const struct dpu_caps sm8150_dpu_caps = {
>>>>>>>      	.max_vdeci_exp = MAX_VERT_DECIMATION,
>>>>>>>      };
>>>>>>> +static const struct dpu_caps sc8180x_dpu_caps = {
>>>>>>> +	.max_mixer_width = DEFAULT_DPU_OUTPUT_LINE_WIDTH,
>>>>>>> +	.max_mixer_blendstages = 0xb,
>>>>>>> +	.qseed_type = DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED3,
>>>>>>> +	.smart_dma_rev = DPU_SSPP_SMART_DMA_V2, /* TODO: v2.5 */
>>>>>>> +	.ubwc_version = DPU_HW_UBWC_VER_30,
>>>>>>> +	.has_src_split = true,
>>>>>>> +	.has_dim_layer = true,
>>>>>>> +	.has_idle_pc = true,
>>>>>>> +	.has_3d_merge = true,
>>>>>>> +	.max_linewidth = 4096,
>>>>>>> +	.pixel_ram_size = DEFAULT_PIXEL_RAM_SIZE,
>>>>>>> +	.max_hdeci_exp = MAX_HORZ_DECIMATION,
>>>>>>> +	.max_vdeci_exp = MAX_VERT_DECIMATION,
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>      static const struct dpu_caps sm8250_dpu_caps = {
>>>>>>>      	.max_mixer_width = DEFAULT_DPU_OUTPUT_LINE_WIDTH,
>>>>>>>      	.max_mixer_blendstages = 0xb,
>>>>>>> @@ -293,6 +320,31 @@ static const struct dpu_mdp_cfg sc7180_mdp[] = {
>>>>>>>      	},
>>>>>>>      };
>>>>>>> +static const struct dpu_mdp_cfg sc8180x_mdp[] = {
>>>>>>> +	{
>>>>>>> +	.name = "top_0", .id = MDP_TOP,
>>>>>>> +	.base = 0x0, .len = 0x45C,
>>>>>>> +	.features = 0,
>>>>>>> +	.highest_bank_bit = 0x3,
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_VIG0] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2AC, .bit_off = 0},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_VIG1] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2B4, .bit_off = 0},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_VIG2] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2BC, .bit_off = 0},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_VIG3] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2C4, .bit_off = 0},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA0] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2AC, .bit_off = 8},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_DMA1] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2B4, .bit_off = 8},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR0] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2BC, .bit_off = 8},
>>>>>>> +	.clk_ctrls[DPU_CLK_CTRL_CURSOR1] = {
>>>>>>> +			.reg_off = 0x2C4, .bit_off = 8},
>>>>>>> +	},
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>      static const struct dpu_mdp_cfg sm8250_mdp[] = {
>>>>>>>      	{
>>>>>>>      	.name = "top_0", .id = MDP_TOP,
>>>>>>> @@ -861,6 +913,16 @@ static const struct dpu_intf_cfg sc7280_intf[] = {
>>>>>>>      	INTF_BLK("intf_5", INTF_5, 0x39000, INTF_DP, MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1, 24, INTF_SC7280_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 22, 23),
>>>>>>>      };
>>>>>>> +static const struct dpu_intf_cfg sc8180x_intf[] = {
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_0", INTF_0, 0x6A000, INTF_DP, MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_0, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 24, 25),
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_1", INTF_1, 0x6A800, INTF_DSI, 0, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 26, 27),
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_2", INTF_2, 0x6B000, INTF_DSI, 1, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 28, 29),
>>>>>>> +	/* INTF_3 is for MST, wired to INTF_DP 0 and 1, use dummy index until this is supported */
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_3", INTF_3, 0x6B800, INTF_DP, 999, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 30, 31),
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_4", INTF_4, 0x6C000, INTF_DP, MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_1, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 20, 21),
>>>>>>> +	INTF_BLK("intf_5", INTF_5, 0x6C800, INTF_DP, MSM_DP_CONTROLLER_2, 24, INTF_SC7180_MASK, MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR, 22, 23),
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a continued discussion from
>>>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/474179/.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldnt INTF_5 be marked as INTF_eDP?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Might be, I didn't even know we had an INTF_EDP define...
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any reason to distinguish DP and EDP in the DPU?  I see sc7280
>>>>> doesn't distinguish the DP and EDP interfaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Bjorn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Like I have mentioned in the other patch, I think we have enough confusion
>>>> between eDP and DP with the common driver. Since DPU does have separate
>>>> interfaces I think we should fix that.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding sc7280 using INTF_DP, I synced up with Sankeerth. He referred to
>>>> your change
>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/457776/?series=92992&rev=5 as it was
>>>> posted earlier and ended up using the same INTF_DP macro. So its turning out
>>>> to be a cyclical error.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That made me take a second look at the HPG, and sure enough INTF_5 on
>>> SC7280 is connected to a eDP/DP Combo PHY. We have the same setup in
>>> SC8280XP.
>>>
>>> In SC8180X, INTF_5 is documented as being connected to a eDP (only) PHY,
>>> so perhaps it makes sense to do it there, but for the others its wrong.
>>>
>>
>> Here you are specifying the controller in the catalog.
> 
> No, I'm specifying the type of the INTF. We then use the type of the
> intf and the index to match that to a particular DP TX block.
> 
>> So independent of the PHY thats being used, shouldnt this remain
>> INTF_eDP?
>>
> 
> I don't think it's going to help anyone to say that an interface
> connected to a PHY that can be either DP or EDP, should be INTF_EDP.
> 
> People are going to make assumptions in the code such as INTF_EDP does
> not have audio and then someone designs a board based on SC7280 with DP
> output where they expect audio. Or assumptions about HPD, panel etc...
> 
> I'm not saying that we have all the details figured out on how that's
> going to be controlled, but until there's a reason to distinguish
> INTF_DP from INTF_EDP I think we should not make one up. And I don't see
> that those differences should be hard coded in the DPU driver.
> 
> 
> If it's confusing to people that DP might be driving an EDP output, then
> perhaps we can just name it TMDS again? ;)

If you prefer to have TMDS, then like I commented earlier we dont really 
need this change https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/474271/ :)

Whats the benefit of making that change? DRM_ENCODER_TMDS_* can be eDP 
and DP . Then there is no confusion or guess work in the encoder.

DRM_ENCODER_DSI - INTF_DSI
DRM_ENCODER_VIRTUAL - INTF_WB
DRM_ENCODER_TMDS - INTF_DP OR INTF_eDP ( doesnt matter )

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn

More information about the dri-devel mailing list