From: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
To: "Noralf Trønnes" <noralf@tronnes.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: MIPI DSI, DBI, and tinydrm drivers
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 23:33:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <GKUUAQ.UZ3OW5SM7R453@crapouillou.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4075c4f-1c32-3b97-831a-707d0b588ed5@tronnes.org>
Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 23:24, Noralf Trønnes <noralf@tronnes.org> a
écrit :
>
>
> Den 24.05.2020 22.42, skrev Paul Cercueil:
>>
>>
>> Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 22:14, Noralf Trønnes <noralf@tronnes.org>
>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> Den 24.05.2020 21.54, skrev Paul Cercueil:
>>>> Hi Noralf,
>>>>
>>>> Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 19:46, Noralf Trønnes
>>>> <noralf@tronnes.org> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Den 24.05.2020 18.13, skrev Paul Cercueil:
>>>>>> Hi list,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to open a discussion about the current support of
>>>>>> MIPI
>>>>>> DSI and
>>>>>> DBI panels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both are standards from the MIPI alliance, both are
>>>>>> communication
>>>>>> protocols between a LCD controller and a LCD panel, they
>>>>>> generally both
>>>>>> use the same commands (DCS), the main difference is that DSI
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> serial
>>>>>> and DBI is generally parallel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the kernel right now, DSI is pretty well implemented. All
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> infrastucture to register a DSI host, DSI device etc. is
>>>>>> there. DSI
>>>>>> panels are implemented as regular drm_panel instances, and
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> drivers
>>>>>> go through the DSI API to communicate with the panel, which
>>>>>> makes
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> independent of the DSI host driver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DBI, on the other hand, does not have any of this. All (?) DBI
>>>>>> panels
>>>>>> are implemented as tinydrm drivers, which make them
>>>>>> impossible to
>>>>>> use
>>>>>> with regular DRM drivers. Writing a standard drm_panel driver
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> impossible, as there is no concept of host and device. All
>>>>>> these
>>>>>> tinydrm
>>>>>> drivers register their own DBI host as they all do DBI over
>>>>>> SPI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think this needs a good cleanup. Given that DSI and DBI are
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> similar, it would probably make sense to fuse DBI support
>>>>>> into the
>>>>>> current DSI code, as trying to update DBI would result in a
>>>>>> lot
>>>>>> of code
>>>>>> being duplicated. With the proper host/device registration
>>>>>> mechanism
>>>>>> from DSI code, it would be possible to turn most of the
>>>>>> tinydrm
>>>>>> drivers
>>>>>> into regular drm_panel drivers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem then is that these should still be available as
>>>>>> tinydrm
>>>>>> drivers. If the DSI/DBI panels can somehow register a
>>>>>> .update_fb()
>>>>>> callback, it would make it possible to have a panel-agnostic
>>>>>> tinydrm
>>>>>> driver, which would then probably open a lot of doors, and
>>>>>> help a
>>>>>> lot to
>>>>>> clean the mess.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I can help with that, I just need some guidance - I am
>>>>>> fishing
>>>>>> in exotic seas here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts, comments, are very welcome.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did look at this a few months back:
>>>>>
>>>>> drm/mipi-dbi: Support panel drivers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2019-August/228966.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem with DBI is that it has reused other busses which
>>>>> means we
>>>>> don't have DBI drivers, we have SPI drivers instead (6800/8080
>>>>> is not
>>>>> avail. as busses in Linux yet). DSI and DPI on the other hand
>>>>> has
>>>>> dedicated hw controller drivers not shared with other
>>>>> subsystems.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that should be much of a problem. You could have a
>>>> DBI/SPI
>>>> bridge, that wraps a SPI device into a DBI host, for instance.
>>>> The
>>>> panel
>>>> drivers would just use the DBI API without having to know what's
>>>> done
>>>> behind the scene.
>>>
>>> This will be a bridge implemented in software, are we allowed to
>>> have
>>> software devices in the Device Tree? I though it was just allowed
>>> to
>>> describe hardware.
>>
>> It wouldn't appear in devicetree. If the panel is connected over
>> SPI,
>> then DBI is just the protocol it uses.
>
> How do you attach a panel to the DBI device if it doesn't appear in
> DT?
When probed from a DBI host controller, the panel's devicetree binding
would look like this:
&dbi_host {
panel {
compatible = "my,dbi-device";
};
};
When probed from SPI it would appear in DT like this:
&spi {
panel@0 {
reg = <0>;
compatible = "my,dbi-device-spi";
};
};
In that case, the driver would create a SPI-DBI bridge, but that is an
implementation detail that doesn't belong in devicetree.
> Another problem is that the DBI panel uses SPI both for framebuffer
> upload and controller initialization. How shall this be handled when
> the
> panel driver needs SPI for init and the DBI bridge needs SPI for frame
> upload?
Does the panel driver need SPI for init? I don't think so. It needs to
send DBI commands over SPI, yes. Only the DBI-SPI bridge would control
the SPI device.
-Paul
>>
>> If probed as a SPI device driver, the panel's spi_driver would
>> register
>> an instance of the DBI/SPI host driver, then register itself as a
>> dbi_driver. If probed from a DBI host it would just register itself
>> as a
>> dbi_driver.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>>>>
>>>>> My initial tinydrm work used drm_panel, but I was not allowed to
>>>>> use it
>>>>> (at least not the way I had done it).
>>>>>
>>>>> Noralf.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-25 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-24 16:13 MIPI DSI, DBI, and tinydrm drivers Paul Cercueil
2020-05-24 17:46 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-24 18:35 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-05-24 19:50 ` Paul Cercueil
2020-05-25 14:58 ` Neil Armstrong
2020-05-27 12:10 ` Paul Cercueil
2020-05-25 10:08 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-28 15:27 ` Emil Velikov
2020-06-03 12:15 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-06-03 20:25 ` Emil Velikov
2020-06-05 12:58 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-24 19:54 ` Paul Cercueil
2020-05-24 20:14 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-24 20:42 ` Paul Cercueil
2020-05-24 21:24 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-24 21:33 ` Paul Cercueil [this message]
2020-05-25 0:46 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-25 2:05 ` Paul Cercueil
2020-05-25 13:23 ` Noralf Trønnes
2020-05-24 20:06 ` Sam Ravnborg
2020-05-25 1:46 ` Paul Cercueil
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=GKUUAQ.UZ3OW5SM7R453@crapouillou.net \
--to=paul@crapouillou.net \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=noralf@tronnes.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).