From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C9AC3A5A0 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:32:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1C10214DA for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:32:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="WOqs3oV+"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="htClZ8PS" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B1C10214DA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=cLYNUm1GDrRefi3+Fs70oAgGAq0DTSSSosLvMEuDz5o=; b=WOqs3oV+j3mN/J SbQbqWbZk3Y2F3XEZ/uCqa2h9pPbx9n5HptnhnHPPGQLG2ZGRiFoEfnSj5W492yUqzZXRgkKyXnyK 9W1V5N4pPHQCX1Lltly5wW9SaBn1f/4sn5FZW77O1Lv2+Nt+4VCl0etn+sjYLMJg+nvUo6G/SG2LX MOq/JB9FxAl7m/Q9rwGYdNHI50PKCPe4IWAiN0YVsp597tdd2M6Qx5XO0wfCClQJd7St/o0CdEkDF kK+NyJlb3Kgz93zebSG02BV6im8QSOJuPzV7eSgWV1aBkcIHsur48CwufLvxnbishh8pq5vN8BlGd HA2d60l6IrtJyqMyf7ow==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i0cuA-0000CH-Sz; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:32:50 +0000 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([213.167.242.64]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1i0cu5-0000Bm-UM; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:32:48 +0000 Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (dfj612yhrgyx302h3jwwy-3.rev.dnainternet.fi [IPv6:2001:14ba:21f5:5b00:ce28:277f:58d7:3ca4]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4434D2DF; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 04:32:38 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1566441158; bh=Hi7/uSswDhi9qJmLVXSvk//zJ2fMZhwGx+tnnkHYTRk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=htClZ8PSiifvZURdJJNZ9L8FCTONLwLGgaCuhbvc+5Z2yoOGT/q6U54HsZ+rWlkze 3gWaJhl4sbhd8YfRk4s4c1afSXgb9E9OK8YywZNvz9F1+07Tn7wwsw1wvg640c0TtO s1z5ReZ6HUBFfZ2Mb8/ctOWD4Pjk60862tzrDNXQ= Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 05:32:32 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Helen Koike Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/14] media: rkisp1: add Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY driver Message-ID: <20190822023232.GE17402@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20190730184256.30338-1-helen.koike@collabora.com> <20190730184256.30338-5-helen.koike@collabora.com> <20190807130558.GF822@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk> <20190815175440.GW5011@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <28b05c0e-2f68-aecb-536a-c543bcd43de1@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <28b05c0e-2f68-aecb-536a-c543bcd43de1@collabora.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190821_193246_345167_8B6BC7FF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 31.05 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, eddie.cai.linux@gmail.com, kernel@collabora.com, heiko@sntech.de, jacob2.chen@rock-chips.com, jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com, zyc@rock-chips.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tfiga@chromium.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Sakari Ailus , sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com, zhengsq@rock-chips.com, hans.verkuil@cisco.com, mchehab@kernel.org, ezequiel@collabora.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Helen, On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 06:46:15PM -0300, Helen Koike wrote: > On 8/15/19 2:54 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 10:37:55AM -0300, Helen Koike wrote: > >> On 8/7/19 10:05 AM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 03:42:46PM -0300, Helen Koike wrote: > >>>> From: Jacob Chen > >>>> > >>>> This commit adds a subdev driver for Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY driver > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Jacob Chen > >>>> Signed-off-by: Shunqian Zheng > >>>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Figa > >>>> [migrate to phy framework] > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia > >>>> [update for upstream] > >>>> Signed-off-by: Helen Koike > >>>> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> Changes in v8: > >>>> - Remove boiler plate license text > >>>> > >>>> Changes in v7: > >>>> - Migrate dphy specific code from > >>>> drivers/media/platform/rockchip/isp1/mipi_dphy_sy.c > >>>> to drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c > >>>> - Drop support for rk3288 > >>>> - Drop support for dphy txrx > >>>> - code styling and checkpatch fixes > >>>> > >>>> drivers/phy/rockchip/Kconfig | 8 + > >>>> drivers/phy/rockchip/Makefile | 1 + > >>>> drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c | 408 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 417 insertions(+) > >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/rockchip/Kconfig b/drivers/phy/rockchip/Kconfig > >>>> index c454c90cd99e..afd072f135e6 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/phy/rockchip/Kconfig > >>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/rockchip/Kconfig > >>>> @@ -9,6 +9,14 @@ config PHY_ROCKCHIP_DP > >>>> help > >>>> Enable this to support the Rockchip Display Port PHY. > >>>> > >>>> +config PHY_ROCKCHIP_DPHY > >>>> + tristate "Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY driver" > > > > How much of this PHY is Rockchip-specific ? Would it make sense to turn > > it into a Synopsys DPHY driver, with some Rockchip glue ? I suppose this > > could always be done later, if needed (and I also suppose there's no > > existing driver in drivers/phy/ that support the same Synopsys IP). > > > >>>> + depends on ARCH_ROCKCHIP && OF > >>> > >>> How about (...) || COMPILE_TEST ? > >>> > >>>> + select GENERIC_PHY_MIPI_DPHY > >>>> + select GENERIC_PHY > >>>> + help > >>>> + Enable this to support the Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY. > >>>> + > >>>> config PHY_ROCKCHIP_EMMC > >>>> tristate "Rockchip EMMC PHY Driver" > >>>> depends on ARCH_ROCKCHIP && OF > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/rockchip/Makefile b/drivers/phy/rockchip/Makefile > >>>> index fd21cbaf40dd..f62e9010bcaf 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/phy/rockchip/Makefile > >>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/rockchip/Makefile > >>>> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ > >>>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_DP) += phy-rockchip-dp.o > >>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_DPHY) += phy-rockchip-dphy.o > >>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_EMMC) += phy-rockchip-emmc.o > >>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_INNO_HDMI) += phy-rockchip-inno-hdmi.o > >>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PHY_ROCKCHIP_INNO_USB2) += phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.o > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c > >>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>> index 000000000000..3a29976c2dff > >>>> --- /dev/null > >>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-dphy.c > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,408 @@ > >>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) > >>>> +/* > >>>> + * Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY driver > >>>> + * > >>>> + * Based on: > >>>> + * > >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2016 FuZhou Rockchip Co., Ltd. > >>>> + * Author: Yakir Yang > >>>> + */ > >>>> + > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> +#include > >>>> + > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON9 0x6224 > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON21 0x6254 > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON22 0x6258 > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON23 0x625c > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24 0x6260 > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON25 0x6264 > >>>> +#define RK3399_GRF_SOC_STATUS1 0xe2a4 > >>>> + > >>>> +#define CLOCK_LANE_HS_RX_CONTROL 0x34 > >>>> +#define LANE0_HS_RX_CONTROL 0x44 > >>>> +#define LANE1_HS_RX_CONTROL 0x54 > >>>> +#define LANE2_HS_RX_CONTROL 0x84 > >>>> +#define LANE3_HS_RX_CONTROL 0x94 > >>>> +#define HS_RX_DATA_LANES_THS_SETTLE_CONTROL 0x75 > >>>> + > >>>> +#define MAX_DPHY_CLK 8 > >>>> + > >>>> +#define PHY_TESTEN_ADDR (0x1 << 16) > >>>> +#define PHY_TESTEN_DATA (0x0 << 16) > >>>> +#define PHY_TESTCLK (0x1 << 1) > >>>> +#define PHY_TESTCLR (0x1 << 0) > > > > Maybe s/0x// for the previous four lines ? > > > >>>> +#define THS_SETTLE_COUNTER_THRESHOLD 0x04 > >>>> + > >>>> +#define HIWORD_UPDATE(val, mask, shift) \ > >>>> + ((val) << (shift) | (mask) << ((shift) + 16)) > > > > As you use this in a single place, I would inline it, possibly with a > > small comment that explains what's happening. > > > >>>> + > >>>> +#define GRF_SOC_CON12 0x0274 > >>>> + > >>>> +#define GRF_EDP_REF_CLK_SEL_INTER_HIWORD_MASK BIT(20) > >>>> +#define GRF_EDP_REF_CLK_SEL_INTER BIT(4) > >>>> + > >>>> +#define GRF_EDP_PHY_SIDDQ_HIWORD_MASK BIT(21) > >>>> +#define GRF_EDP_PHY_SIDDQ_ON 0 > >>>> +#define GRF_EDP_PHY_SIDDQ_OFF BIT(5) > > > > I would recommend aligning the value of of all macros in the same way. > > > >>>> + > >>>> +struct hsfreq_range { > >>>> + u32 range_h; > > > > The structure would be more compact if you turned this into a u16. > > > >>>> + u8 cfg_bit; > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct hsfreq_range rk3399_mipidphy_hsfreq_ranges[] = { > >>>> + { 89, 0x00}, { 99, 0x10}, { 109, 0x20}, { 129, 0x01}, > >>>> + { 139, 0x11}, { 149, 0x21}, { 169, 0x02}, { 179, 0x12}, > >>>> + { 199, 0x22}, { 219, 0x03}, { 239, 0x13}, { 249, 0x23}, > >>>> + { 269, 0x04}, { 299, 0x14}, { 329, 0x05}, { 359, 0x15}, > >>>> + { 399, 0x25}, { 449, 0x06}, { 499, 0x16}, { 549, 0x07}, > >>>> + { 599, 0x17}, { 649, 0x08}, { 699, 0x18}, { 749, 0x09}, > >>>> + { 799, 0x19}, { 849, 0x29}, { 899, 0x39}, { 949, 0x0a}, > >>>> + { 999, 0x1a}, {1049, 0x2a}, {1099, 0x3a}, {1149, 0x0b}, > >>>> + {1199, 0x1b}, {1249, 0x2b}, {1299, 0x3b}, {1349, 0x0c}, > >>>> + {1399, 0x1c}, {1449, 0x2c}, {1500, 0x3c} > > > > Maybe s/{/{ / and s/}/ }/ to give it a bit more air ? :-) > > > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static const char * const rk3399_mipidphy_clks[] = { > >>>> + "dphy-ref", > >>>> + "dphy-cfg", > >>>> + "grf", > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +enum dphy_reg_id { > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNDISABLE = 0, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCERXMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_ENABLE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLR, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTEN, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDIN, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNREQUEST, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDOUT, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNDISABLE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCERXMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNREQUEST, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNDISABLE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCERXMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCETXSTOPMODE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLE, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_MASTERSLAVEZ, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_BASEDIR, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLECLK, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNREQUEST, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX1_SRC_SEL, > >>>> + /* rk3288 only */ > >>>> + GRF_CON_DISABLE_ISP, > >>>> + GRF_CON_ISP_DPHY_SEL, > >>>> + GRF_DSI_CSI_TESTBUS_SEL, > >>>> + GRF_DVP_V18SEL, > >>>> + /* below is for rk3399 only */ > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX0_CLK_INV_SEL, > >>>> + GRF_DPHY_RX1_CLK_INV_SEL, > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +struct dphy_reg { > >>>> + u32 offset; > >>>> + u32 mask; > >>>> + u32 shift; > > > > The offset should hold in 16 bits and the mask and shift in 8 bits. That > > would save space in the table below. > > > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +#define PHY_REG(_offset, _width, _shift) \ > >>>> + { .offset = _offset, .mask = BIT(_width) - 1, .shift = _shift, } > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct dphy_reg rk3399_grf_dphy_regs[] = { > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON9, 4, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_CLK_INV_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON9, 1, 10), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX1_CLK_INV_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON9, 1, 11), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_ENABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON21, 4, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON21, 4, 4), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON21, 4, 8), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON21, 4, 12), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON22, 4, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON22, 4, 4), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON22, 4, 8), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON22, 4, 12), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON23, 4, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON23, 4, 4), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON23, 4, 8), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON23, 4, 12), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24, 4, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX1_SRC_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24, 1, 4), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_BASEDIR] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24, 1, 5), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLECLK] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24, 1, 6), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_MASTERSLAVEZ] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON24, 1, 7), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDIN] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON25, 8, 0), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTEN] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON25, 1, 8), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON25, 1, 9), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLR] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_CON25, 1, 10), > >>>> + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDOUT] = PHY_REG(RK3399_GRF_SOC_STATUS1, 8, 0), > > > > The annoying part with such an indirection is that you can't really > > write multiple fields in a single register with a single operation. > > Is the register mapping completely different between the rk3288 and the > > rk3399, or are the fields grouped in registers in a similar way ? In the > > latter case we could possibly optimise it. > > This would be the rk3288 version: > > +static const struct dphy_reg rk3288_grf_dphy_regs[] = { > + [GRF_CON_DISABLE_ISP] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON6, 1, 0), > + [GRF_CON_ISP_DPHY_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON6, 1, 1), > + [GRF_DSI_CSI_TESTBUS_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON6, 1, 14), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON8, 4, 0), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON8, 4, 4), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON8, 4, 8), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON9, 4, 0), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON9, 4, 4), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON9, 4, 8), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON9, 4, 12), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNDISABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON10, 4, 0), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCERXMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON10, 4, 4), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON10, 4, 8), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_ENABLE] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON10, 4, 12), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLR] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 0), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 1), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTEN] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 2), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDIN] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 8, 3), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_ENABLECLK] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 12), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX1_SRC_SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 13), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_MASTERSLAVEZ] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 14), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_BASEDIR] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON14, 1, 15), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON15, 4, 0), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX1RX1_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON15, 4, 4), > + [GRF_DPHY_TX0_TURNREQUEST] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_CON15, 3, 8), > + [GRF_DVP_V18SEL] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_IO_VSEL, 1, 1), > + [GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDOUT] = PHY_REG(RK3288_GRF_SOC_STATUS21, 8, 0), > +}; > > Which seems different mask and shifts from rk3399. If you have any ideas in > how to optimize this I would appreciate it. It would be tricky indeed :-( Nevermind for now. > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +struct dphy_drv_data { > >>>> + const char * const *clks; > >>>> + int num_clks; > > > > This is never negative, you can make it an unsigned int. > > > >>>> + const struct hsfreq_range *hsfreq_ranges; > >>>> + int num_hsfreq_ranges; > > > > Same here. > > > >>>> + const struct dphy_reg *regs; > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +struct rockchip_dphy { > >>>> + struct device *dev; > >>>> + struct regmap *grf; > >>>> + const struct dphy_reg *grf_regs; > >>>> + struct clk_bulk_data clks[MAX_DPHY_CLK]; > >>>> + > >>>> + const struct dphy_drv_data *drv_data; > >>>> + struct phy_configure_opts_mipi_dphy config; > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static inline void write_grf_reg(struct rockchip_dphy *priv, > >>>> + int index, u8 value) > > > > Maybe unsigned int index ? > > > >>>> +{ > >>>> + const struct dphy_reg *reg = &priv->grf_regs[index]; > >>>> + unsigned int val = HIWORD_UPDATE(value, reg->mask, reg->shift); > >>>> + > >>>> + WARN_ON(!reg->offset); > >>>> + regmap_write(priv->grf, reg->offset, val); > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static void mipidphy0_wr_reg(struct rockchip_dphy *priv, > >>>> + u8 test_code, u8 test_data) > > > > Function (and structure) names have different prefixes, would it make > > sense to standardise them ? Maybe rockchip_dphy_ ? Or rk_dphy_ for a > > shorter version ? This could become rk_dphy_write_dphy(), and the > > previous function rk_dphy_write_grf(). > > > >>>> +{ > >>>> + /* > >>>> + * With the falling edge on TESTCLK, the TESTDIN[7:0] signal content > >>>> + * is latched internally as the current test code. Test data is > >>>> + * programmed internally by rising edge on TESTCLK. > >>>> + */ > > > > I've never understood why PHYs tend to have a register named TEST that > > contains way more than test data :-) > > > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK, 1); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDIN, test_code); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTEN, 1); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK, 0); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTEN, 0); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTDIN, test_data); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK, 1); > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +/* should be move to power_on */ > > > > s/move/moved/ > > > > Do you mean merging the two functions together ? What prevents from > > doing so ? > > Nothing really, this is a left over command as mipidphy_rx_stream_on() is already > being called from power_on, and I don't think we should merge it because > in the future we'll probably going to have mipidphy_txrx_stream_on() for dphy1. Fine with me, let's just remove the comment then. > >>>> +static int mipidphy_rx_stream_on(struct rockchip_dphy *priv) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + const struct dphy_drv_data *drv_data = priv->drv_data; > >>>> + const struct hsfreq_range *hsfreq_ranges = drv_data->hsfreq_ranges; > >>>> + struct phy_configure_opts_mipi_dphy *config = &priv->config; > >>>> + unsigned int i, hsfreq = 0, data_rate_mbps = config->hs_clk_rate; > >>>> + int num_hsfreq_ranges = drv_data->num_hsfreq_ranges; > >>>> + > >>>> + do_div(data_rate_mbps, 1000 * 1000); > >>>> + > >>>> + dev_dbg(priv->dev, "%s: lanes %d - data_rate_mbps %u\n", > >>>> + __func__, config->lanes, data_rate_mbps); > >>>> + > >>>> + for (i = 0; i < num_hsfreq_ranges; i++) { > >>>> + if (hsfreq_ranges[i].range_h >= data_rate_mbps) { > >>>> + hsfreq = hsfreq_ranges[i].cfg_bit; > >>>> + break; > >>>> + } > >>>> + } > > > > As num_hsfreq_ranges and hsfreq_ranges are only used in this loop, I > > would remove the local variables. > > > >>>> + > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCERXMODE, 0); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_FORCETXSTOPMODE, 0); > >>>> + > >>>> + /* Disable lan turn around, which is ignored in receive mode */ > > > > Is it "lan turn around", or "lane turn around" ? > > > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNREQUEST, 0); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TURNDISABLE, 0xf); > >>>> + > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_ENABLE, GENMASK(config->lanes - 1, 0)); > >>>> + > >>>> + /* dphy start */ > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLK, 1); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLR, 1); > >>>> + usleep_range(100, 150); > >>>> + write_grf_reg(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_TESTCLR, 0); > >>>> + usleep_range(100, 150); > >>>> + > >>>> + /* set clock lane */ > >>>> + /* HS hsfreq_range & lane 0 settle bypass */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, CLOCK_LANE_HS_RX_CONTROL, 0); > >>>> + /* HS RX Control of lane0 */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, LANE0_HS_RX_CONTROL, hsfreq << 1); > >>>> + /* HS RX Control of lane1 */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, LANE1_HS_RX_CONTROL, 0); > >>>> + /* HS RX Control of lane2 */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, LANE2_HS_RX_CONTROL, 0); > >>>> + /* HS RX Control of lane3 */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, LANE3_HS_RX_CONTROL, 0); > > > > Does this hardcode usage of a single lane ? > > Rockchip seems to uses TEST* registers to set the hsfreqrange. > It mentions the test code 0x44 (which is LANE0_HS_RX_CONTROL) > but it doesn't mention the others lanes. > > Replacing those call by > mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, LANEx_HS_RX_CONTROL, hsfreq << 1); > seems to be working. > > I can check if this changes the datarate (I just need to figure a proper > way to test this or get some docs). > > Thanks for spotting this. We've discussed this on IRC, it's not clear if the above code is incorrect or not. Let's add this to a list of open issues. > >>>> + /* HS RX Data Lanes Settle State Time Control */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, HS_RX_DATA_LANES_THS_SETTLE_CONTROL, > >>>> + THS_SETTLE_COUNTER_THRESHOLD); > >>>> + > >>>> + /* Normal operation */ > >>>> + mipidphy0_wr_reg(priv, 0x0, 0); > >>>> + > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_configure(struct phy *phy, union phy_configure_opts *opts) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > >>>> + int ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* pass with phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config (with pixel rate?) */ > > > > I'm not sure to understand what this means. > > iirc, the question is if we should fail when phy_mipi_dphy_config_validate() fails, > or if we should use a default config. > > Looking at other examples, is seems that only two drivers call > phy_mipi_dphy_get_default_config() in a totally diferent context, not in mipi path. > So I guess I would just remove this comment if this is ok with you. OK. > >>>> + ret = phy_mipi_dphy_config_validate(&opts->mipi_dphy); > >>>> + if (ret) > >>>> + return ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + memcpy(&priv->config, opts, sizeof(priv->config)); > >>> > >>> You could to: > >>> > >>> priv->config = *opts; > >>> > >>> Up to you. Some people like memcpy(). :-) > >> > >> your way is better thanks! > >> > >>>> + > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_power_on(struct phy *phy) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > >>>> + int ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + ret = clk_bulk_enable(priv->drv_data->num_clks, priv->clks); > >>>> + if (ret) > >>>> + return ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + return mipidphy_rx_stream_on(priv); > > > > Should you call clk_bulk_disable() if mipidphy_rx_stream_on() fails ? > > Actually that function never fails, so I'd make it a void function, and > > return 0 here. > > Ack, I made it void, I'll send it in the next version. > > > What happens if the clock rate is higher than the maximum supported by > > the PHY ? Shouldn't rockchip_dphy_configure() fail in that case ? > > This is checked in function mipidphy_rx_stream_on(), if it is higher we just > configure the maximum supported rate. Is this ok? I think it would be better to reject that in rockchip_dphy_configure() in order to let the user of the PHY handle the error as early as possible. > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_power_off(struct phy *phy) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > >>>> + > > > > No need to write any register ? That's scary, what will happen on the > > next power on, when the clocks gets enabled ? > > Just for testing, I hacked the code to only call mipidphy_rx_stream_on() once, > when streaming for the first time, then I don't call it anymore and starting/stopping > streaming always works, so I guess it keeps the previous configuration when clocks > get enabled. > I wonder if this can be a problem when switching from dphy rx to txrx, but for now > we just support rx. > > Maybe just calling rk_dphy_write_grf(priv, GRF_DPHY_RX0_ENABLE, 0) is enough. If that works with disable/enable sequences I think it would be good to include it. > >>>> + clk_bulk_disable(priv->drv_data->num_clks, priv->clks); > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_init(struct phy *phy) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > >>>> + int ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + ret = clk_bulk_prepare(priv->drv_data->num_clks, priv->clks); > >>> > >>> return ...; > >>> > >>>> + if (ret) > >>>> + return ret; > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_exit(struct phy *phy) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > >>>> + > >>>> + clk_bulk_unprepare(priv->drv_data->num_clks, priv->clks); > >>>> + return 0; > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct phy_ops rockchip_dphy_ops = { > >>>> + .power_on = rockchip_dphy_power_on, > >>>> + .power_off = rockchip_dphy_power_off, > >>>> + .init = rockchip_dphy_init, > >>>> + .exit = rockchip_dphy_exit, > >>>> + .configure = rockchip_dphy_configure, > >>>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct dphy_drv_data rk3399_mipidphy_drv_data = { > >>>> + .clks = rk3399_mipidphy_clks, > >>>> + .num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(rk3399_mipidphy_clks), > >>>> + .hsfreq_ranges = rk3399_mipidphy_hsfreq_ranges, > >>>> + .num_hsfreq_ranges = ARRAY_SIZE(rk3399_mipidphy_hsfreq_ranges), > >>>> + .regs = rk3399_grf_dphy_regs, > >>> > >>> Do you expect to support more of the similar PHY(s) --- are there such? If > >>> not, you could put these in the code that uses them. > >> > >> Yes, for rk3288 in the future. > >> > >>>> +}; > >>>> + > >>>> +static const struct of_device_id rockchip_dphy_dt_ids[] = { > >>>> + { > >>>> + .compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-mipi-dphy", > >>>> + .data = &rk3399_mipidphy_drv_data, > >>>> + }, > >>>> + {} > >>>> +}; > >>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rockchip_dphy_dt_ids); > >>>> + > >>>> +static int rockchip_dphy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>>> +{ > >>>> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > >>>> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node; > >>>> + const struct dphy_drv_data *drv_data; > >>>> + struct phy_provider *phy_provider; > >>>> + const struct of_device_id *of_id; > >>>> + struct rockchip_dphy *priv; > >>>> + struct regmap *grf; > >>>> + struct phy *phy; > >>>> + unsigned int i; > >>>> + int ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + if (!dev->parent || !dev->parent->of_node) > >>>> + return -ENODEV; > >>>> + > >>>> + if (platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0)) { > >>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Rockchip DPHY driver only suports rx\n"); > > > > You can replace pdev->dev with dev here and below. > > > > s/rx/RX mode/ ? > > > >>>> + return -EINVAL; > >>>> + } > >>>> + > >>>> + priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL); > >>>> + if (!priv) > >>>> + return -ENOMEM; > >>>> + priv->dev = dev; > >>>> + > >>>> + grf = syscon_node_to_regmap(dev->parent->of_node); > >>>> + if (IS_ERR(grf)) { > >>>> + grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, > >>>> + "rockchip,grf"); > >>>> + if (IS_ERR(grf)) { > >>>> + dev_err(dev, "Can't find GRF syscon\n"); > >>>> + return -ENODEV; > >>>> + } > >>>> + } > >>>> + priv->grf = grf; > >>>> + > >>>> + of_id = of_match_device(rockchip_dphy_dt_ids, dev); > >>>> + if (!of_id) > >>>> + return -EINVAL; > >>>> + > >>>> + drv_data = of_id->data; > >>>> + priv->grf_regs = drv_data->regs; > > > > Do you have to store grf_regs in priv, or could it be accessed through > > priv->drv_data->regs ? > > > >>>> + priv->drv_data = drv_data; > >>>> + for (i = 0; i < drv_data->num_clks; i++) > >>>> + priv->clks[i].id = drv_data->clks[i]; > >>>> + ret = devm_clk_bulk_get(&pdev->dev, drv_data->num_clks, priv->clks); > >>>> + if (ret) > >>>> + return ret; > >>>> + > >>>> + phy = devm_phy_create(dev, np, &rockchip_dphy_ops); > >>>> + if (IS_ERR(phy)) { > >>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to create phy\n"); > >>>> + return PTR_ERR(phy); > >>>> + } > >>>> + phy_set_drvdata(phy, priv); > >>>> + > >>>> + phy_provider = devm_of_phy_provider_register(dev, of_phy_simple_xlate); > >>>> + > >>>> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(phy_provider); > >>>> +} > >>>> + > >>>> +static struct platform_driver rockchip_dphy_driver = { > >>>> + .probe = rockchip_dphy_probe, > >>>> + .driver = { > >>>> + .name = "rockchip-mipi-dphy", > >>>> + .of_match_table = rockchip_dphy_dt_ids, > >>>> + }, > >>>> +}; > >>>> +module_platform_driver(rockchip_dphy_driver); > >>>> + > >>>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Ezequiel Garcia "); > >>>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Rockchip MIPI Synopsys DPHY driver"); > >>>> +MODULE_LICENSE("Dual MIT/GPL"); > > > > Overall this is quite good, there are only small issues. > > Thank you a lot for your review -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel