[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/dsi: Parse the I2C element from the VBT MIPI sequence block
Matt Roper
matthew.d.roper at intel.com
Tue Jan 7 19:36:11 UTC 2020
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 06:49:04PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 04:00:54PM -0800, Vivek Kasireddy wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 12:05:11 +0100
> > Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi Hans,
> >
> > > Hi Vivek,
> > >
> > > On 03-01-2020 01:00, Vivek Kasireddy wrote:
> > > > Parsing the i2c element is mainly done to transfer the payload from
> > > > the MIPI sequence block to the relevant slave device. In some
> > > > cases, the commands that are part of the payload can be used to
> > > > turn on the backlight.
> > > >
> > > > This patch is actually a refactored version of this old patch:
> > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2014-December/056897.html
> > > >
> > > > In addition to the refactoring, the old patch is augmented by
> > > > looking up the i2c bus from ACPI NS instead of relying on the bus
> > > > number provided in the VBT.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Deepak M <m.deepak at intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Nabendu Maiti <nabendu.bikash.maiti at intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Bob Paauwe <bob.j.paauwe at intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy at intel.com>
> > >
> > > Thank you for this patch, I have been doing a lot of work to make
> > > DSI panels on Bay Trail and Cherry Trail devices work better, as such
> > > I've done a lot of testing of DSI panels. But I have never seen any
> > > MIPI sequences actually use the i2c commands. May I ask how you have
> > > tested this? Do you have a device which actually uses the i2c
> > > commands?
> > Oh, they sure exist; we do have a device that uses i2c commands to turn
> > on the backlight that we have tested this patch on.
>
> And what exactly is that device? That is valuable information that the
> commit message should contain.
I'm not sure if we're allowed to disclose that information. I believe
Vivek is working with an engineering sample and the device itself might
not have been publicly announced by the device manufacturer yet.
Matt
>
> >
> > >
> > > I also have some small review comments inline:
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h | 3 +
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c | 93
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h index
> > > > b15be5814599..5651bc8aa5c2 100644 ---
> > > > a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h +++
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h @@ -68,6 +68,9 @@ struct
> > > > intel_dsi { /* number of DSI lanes */
> > > > unsigned int lane_count;
> > > >
> > > > + /* i2c bus associated with the slave device */
> > > > + int i2c_bus_num;
> > > > +
> > > > /*
> > > > * video mode pixel format
> > > > *
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c index
> > > > f90946c912ee..60441a5a3dba 100644 ---
> > > > a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c +++
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c @@ -83,6 +83,12 @@
> > > > static struct gpio_map vlv_gpio_table[] = { {
> > > > VLV_GPIO_NC_11_PANEL1_BKLTCTL }, };
> > > >
> > > > +struct i2c_adapter_lookup {
> > > > + u16 slave_addr;
> > > > + struct intel_dsi *intel_dsi;
> > > > + acpi_handle dev_handle;
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > #define CHV_GPIO_IDX_START_N 0
> > > > #define CHV_GPIO_IDX_START_E 73
> > > > #define CHV_GPIO_IDX_START_SW 100
> > > > @@ -375,8 +381,93 @@ static const u8 *mipi_exec_gpio(struct
> > > > intel_dsi *intel_dsi, const u8 *data) return data;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static int i2c_adapter_lookup(struct acpi_resource *ares, void
> > > > *data) +{
> > > > + struct i2c_adapter_lookup *lookup = data;
> > > > + struct intel_dsi *intel_dsi = lookup->intel_dsi;
> > > > + struct acpi_resource_i2c_serialbus *sb;
> > > > + struct i2c_adapter *adapter;
> > > > + acpi_handle adapter_handle;
> > > > + acpi_status status;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num >= 0 ||
> > > > + !i2c_acpi_get_i2c_resource(ares, &sb))
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (lookup->slave_addr != sb->slave_address)
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + status = acpi_get_handle(lookup->dev_handle,
> > > > + sb->resource_source.string_ptr,
> > > > + &adapter_handle);
> > > > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + adapter = i2c_acpi_find_adapter_by_handle(adapter_handle);
> > > > + if (adapter)
> > > > + intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num = adapter->nr;
> > > > +
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > static const u8 *mipi_exec_i2c(struct intel_dsi *intel_dsi, const
> > > > u8 *data) {
> > > > + struct drm_device *dev = intel_dsi->base.base.dev;
> > > > + struct i2c_adapter *adapter;
> > > > + struct acpi_device *acpi_dev;
> > > > + struct list_head resource_list;
> > > > + struct i2c_adapter_lookup lookup;
> > > > + struct i2c_msg msg;
> > > > + int ret;
> > > > + u8 vbt_i2c_bus_num = *(data + 2);
> > > > + u16 slave_addr = *(u16 *)(data + 3);
> > > > + u8 reg_offset = *(data + 5);
> > > > + u8 payload_size = *(data + 6);
> > > > + u8 *payload_data;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num < 0) {
> > > > + intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num = vbt_i2c_bus_num;
> > > > +
> > > > + acpi_dev = ACPI_COMPANION(&dev->pdev->dev);
> > > > + if (acpi_dev) {
> > > > + memset(&lookup, 0, sizeof(lookup));
> > > > + lookup.slave_addr = slave_addr;
> > > > + lookup.intel_dsi = intel_dsi;
> > > > + lookup.dev_handle =
> > > > acpi_device_handle(acpi_dev); +
> > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resource_list);
> > > > + acpi_dev_get_resources(acpi_dev,
> > > > &resource_list,
> > > > + i2c_adapter_lookup,
> > > > + &lookup);
> > > > +
> > > > acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list);
> > > > + }
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + adapter = i2c_get_adapter(intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num);
> > > > + if (!adapter)
> > > > + goto out;
> > >
> > > This should never happen, so you should put a DRM_DEV_WARN here.
> > Ok, will do.
> >
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > + payload_data = kzalloc(payload_size + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > + if (!payload_data)
> > > > + goto out;
> > > > +
> > > > + payload_data[0] = reg_offset;
> > > > + memcpy(&payload_data[1], (data + 7), payload_size);
> > > > +
> > > > + msg.addr = slave_addr;
> > > > + msg.flags = 0;
> > > > + msg.len = payload_size + 1;
> > > > + msg.buf = payload_data;
> > > > +
> > > > + ret = i2c_transfer(adapter, &msg, 1);
> > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > + DRM_ERROR("i2c transfer failed");
> > >
> > > DRM_DEV_ERROR? And maybe some more info, like the register which
> > > the transfer is going to + payload size?
> > Ok, adding extra info makes sense.
> >
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > + kfree(payload_data);
> > > > + i2c_put_adapter(adapter);
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Just put out here, no need for the DRM_DEBUG (which should no
> > > longer be a debug now that we implement this) below, since we
> > > WARN or ERROR on all goto out; statements above.
> > Ok, will do.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Vivek
> >
> > >
> > > out:
> > >
> > > > + return data + payload_size + 7;
> > >
> > > And drop these 3 lines:
> > >
> > > > +out:
> > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Skipping I2C element execution\n");
> > > >
> > > > return data + *(data + 6) + 7;
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > @@ -664,6 +755,8 @@ bool intel_dsi_vbt_init(struct intel_dsi
> > > > *intel_dsi, u16 panel_id) intel_dsi->panel_off_delay =
> > > > pps->panel_off_delay / 10; intel_dsi->panel_pwr_cycle_delay =
> > > > pps->panel_power_cycle_delay / 10;
> > > > + intel_dsi->i2c_bus_num = -1;
> > > > +
> > > > /* a regular driver would get the device in probe */
> > > > for_each_dsi_port(port, intel_dsi->ports) {
> > > > mipi_dsi_attach(intel_dsi->dsi_hosts[port]->device);
> > > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Hans
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Matt Roper
Graphics Software Engineer
VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement
Intel Corporation
(916) 356-2795
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list