[PATCH v3 16/17] drm/bridge: cdns-dsi: Tune adjusted_mode->clock according to dsi needs

[Tomi Valkeinen]

Hi,

On 20/04/2025 21:01, Aradhya Bhatia wrote:
> Hi Tomi,
> 
> On 14/04/25 16:41, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> The driver currently expects the pixel clock and the HS clock to be
>> compatible, but the DPHY PLL doesn't give very finely grained rates.
>> This often leads to the situation where the pipeline just fails, as the
>> resulting HS clock is just too off.
>>
>> We could change the driver to do a better job on adjusting the DSI
>> blanking values, hopefully getting a working pipeline even if the pclk
>> and HS clocks are not exactly compatible. But that is a bigger work.
>>
>> What we can do easily is to see in .atomic_check() what HS clock rate we
>> can get, based on the pixel clock rate, and then convert the HS clock
>> rate back to pixel clock rate and ask that rate from the crtc. If the
>> crtc has a good PLL (which is the case for TI K3 SoCs), this will fix
>> any issues wrt. the clock rates.
>>
>> If the crtc cannot provide the requested clock, well, we're no worse off
>> with this patch than what we have at the moment.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen at ideasonboard.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/cadence/cdns-dsi-core.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/cadence/cdns-dsi-core.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/cadence/cdns-dsi-core.c
>> index 63031379459e..165df5d595b8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/cadence/cdns-dsi-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/cadence/cdns-dsi-core.c
>> @@ -908,6 +908,28 @@ static u32 *cdns_dsi_bridge_get_input_bus_fmts(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>>   	return input_fmts;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static long cdns_dsi_round_pclk(struct cdns_dsi *dsi, unsigned long pclk)
>> +{
>> +	struct cdns_dsi_output *output = &dsi->output;
>> +	unsigned int nlanes = output->dev->lanes;
>> +	union phy_configure_opts phy_opts = { 0 };
>> +	u32 bitspp;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	bitspp = mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp(output->dev->format);
>> +
>> +	ret = phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config(pclk, bitspp, nlanes,
>> +					       &phy_opts.mipi_dphy);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		return ret;
>> +
>> +	ret = phy_validate(dsi->dphy, PHY_MODE_MIPI_DPHY, 0, &phy_opts);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		return ret;
>> +
>> +	return div_u64((u64)phy_opts.mipi_dphy.hs_clk_rate * nlanes, bitspp);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int cdns_dsi_bridge_atomic_check(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>>   					struct drm_bridge_state *bridge_state,
>>   					struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state,
>> @@ -919,11 +941,26 @@ static int cdns_dsi_bridge_atomic_check(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>>   	struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode = &crtc_state->adjusted_mode;
>>   	struct cdns_dsi_cfg *dsi_cfg = &dsi_state->dsi_cfg;
>>   	struct videomode vm;
>> +	long pclk;
>>   
>>   	/* cdns-dsi requires negative syncs */
>>   	adjusted_mode->flags &= ~(DRM_MODE_FLAG_PHSYNC | DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC);
>>   	adjusted_mode->flags |= DRM_MODE_FLAG_NHSYNC | DRM_MODE_FLAG_NVSYNC;
>>   
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The DPHY PLL has quite a coarsely grained clock rate options. See
>> +	 * what hsclk rate we can achieve based on the pixel clock, convert it
>> +	 * back to pixel clock, set that to the adjusted_mode->clock. This is
>> +	 * all in hopes that the CRTC will be able to provide us the requested
>> +	 * clock, as otherwise the DPI and DSI clocks will be out of sync.
>> +	 */
>> +
>> +	pclk = cdns_dsi_round_pclk(dsi, adjusted_mode->clock * 1000);
>> +	if (pclk < 0)
>> +		return (int)pclk;
>> +
>> +	adjusted_mode->clock = pclk / 1000;
>> +
>>   	drm_display_mode_to_videomode(adjusted_mode, &vm);
>>   
>>   	return cdns_dsi_check_conf(dsi, &vm, dsi_cfg);
> 
> I think at this point cdns_dsi_check_conf is really only creating a
> dsi_cfg (from the video-mode) so that it can later be used, and then
> running phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config(), and phy_validate(), both of
> which have nothing to do with the freshly made dsi_cfg.

True. And cdns_dsi_mode2cfg() can't fail anymore, so it could be just a 
void function.

> If there is no benefit in running both the latter functions again after
> cdns_dsi_round_pclk() runs them, then perhaps we can just drop the
> cdns_dsi_check_conf() altogether in favor of cdns_dsi_mode2cfg() being
> called from .atomic_check()?

cdns_dsi_round_pclk() doesn't store the phy_cfg anywhere, whereas 
cdns_dsi_check_conf() does.

I think I originally wanted to have this structure, because:

cdns_dsi_round_pclk() is given adjusted_mode->clock * 1000, and it 
returns an "optimal" pixel clock that matches the DSI clock what the DSI 
PLL can provide us.

This rate is then divided by 1000, and set to adjusted_mode->clock.

We then call cdns_dsi_check_conf(), calling 
phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config() and phy_validate(), but this time 
it's with the "optimal" pixel clock (although truncated to kHz). So the 
calls are not identical to cdns_dsi_round_pclk().

Then, I have a local patch that adds some code to cdns_dsi_check_conf(). 
It will check if there is a difference between the requested hs-clk 
(which we got from phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config()) and the final one 
(which we got from phy_validate()), and if so, adjusts the DSI HFP so 
that the total DSI line time would be close to the one we would have 
gotten with the requested hs-clk.

While I think that code is valid, the adjustments were always so small 
that they rounded to 0, so I did not post that patch. Nevertheless, it 
kind of points out that calling the functions again is not totally 
pointless =).

To be honest, I'm a bit reluctant to start rehashing the series. It's 
rather time consuming to test, and some errors are not immediately 
visible, if they're only seen as occasional glitches on the screen.

If the code has no issues as such, I would suggest to do further 
cleanups on top so that we'd get the upstream fixed (as it's very badly 
broken at the moment) asap.

> Furthermore, I understand updating the adjusted_mode->clock might help
> the CRTC to use a pixel clock that's more in-tune with the _actual_
> hs_clk_rate that is going to be generated. But, I am worried that it'll
> cause a delta from the intended fps from the CRTC's end because the
> timings aren't adjusted in accordance with the pixel-clock.

Yes, it does. Also, it's not "more in-tune", as in some cases the clocks 
are not at all in-tune =). The DSI PLL here is quite coarse with the rates.

> Perhaps, along with pixel-clock, we can update the dsi_htotal and
> dpi_htotal both too, to
> 
> new_dsi_htotal = (hs_clk_rate * #lanes) / (dpi_votal * fps * 8)
> new_dpi_htotal = (hs_clk_rate * #lanes) / (dpi_vtotal * fps * bitspp).
> 
> And then, the respective front-porches can too get updated accordingly.

Perhaps. But if there's a bridge after the cdns-dsi, its atomic_check 
has already been called, with the original timings. Did it already use 
those timings for creating its config?

And is it better to output with the timings that (at least try to) match 
the requested ones, but with an adjusted pclk, resulting in fps that 
slightly off, or with both adjusted timings and adjusted pclk, getting a 
better fps match?

In my experience devices usually allow variations in the pixel clock 
quite easily, but some are very strict at getting exactly the timings 
that it expects.

  Tomi