Re: [PATCH v7 3/7] fixup! media: i2c: rdacm21: Break-out ov10640 initialization

[Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>]

Hi Laurent,

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 01:23:25AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 07:55:01PM +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > The embedded OV490 ISP chip provides a secondary SCCB interface and
> > two GPIO lines to control the connected OV10640 image sensor.
> >
> > Break out the OV10640 initialization from the OV490 initialization and
> > explicitely control the powerdown and reset GPIOs. After the image
>
> s/explicitely/explicitly/
>
> > sensor has been hard reset, implement a more clear handling of the
> > secondary SCCB interface to read the image sensor chip ID.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> > index 0428e3209463..944009687de5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> > @@ -30,11 +30,24 @@
> >  #define OV490_PAGE_HIGH_REG		0xfffd
> >  #define OV490_PAGE_LOW_REG		0xfffe
> >
> > +/*
> > + * The SCCB slave handling is undocumented; the registers naming scheme is
> > + * totally arbitrary.
> > + */
> > +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_WRITE		0x00
> > +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_READ		0x01
> > +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR		0x80195000
> > +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_HIGH	0x80195001
> > +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_LOW	0x80195002
> > +
> >  #define OV490_DVP_CTRL3			0x80286009
> >
> >  #define OV490_ODS_CTRL_FRAME_OUTPUT_EN	0x0c
> >  #define OV490_ODS_CTRL			0x8029d000
> >
> > +#define OV490_HOST_CMD			0x808000c0
> > +#define OV490_HOST_CMD_TRIGGER		0xc1
> > +
> >  #define OV490_ID_VAL			0x0490
> >  #define OV490_ID(_p, _v)		((((_p) & 0xff) << 8) | ((_v) & 0xff))
> >  #define OV490_PID			0x8080300a
> > @@ -42,12 +55,22 @@
> >  #define OV490_PID_TIMEOUT		20
> >  #define OV490_OUTPUT_EN_TIMEOUT		300
> >
> > +#define OV490_GPIO0_RESETB		0x01
>
> Shouldn't this be named just OV490_GPIO0 ? The fact that it's connected
> to the RESETB signal of the OV10640 is board-specific, not an OV490
> intrinsic property.
>
> BIT(0) ?
>
> > +#define OV490_SPWDN0			0x01
>
> Same here.
>

Correct, I'll fix...

> > +#define OV490_GPIO_SEL0			0x80800050
> > +#define OV490_GPIO_SEL1			0x80800051
> > +#define OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION0		0x80800054
> > +#define OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION1		0x80800055
> > +#define OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0	0x80800058
> > +#define OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE1	0x80800059
> > +
> >  #define OV490_ISP_HSIZE_LOW		0x80820060
> >  #define OV490_ISP_HSIZE_HIGH		0x80820061
> >  #define OV490_ISP_VSIZE_LOW		0x80820062
> >  #define OV490_ISP_VSIZE_HIGH		0x80820063
> >
> > -#define OV10640_ID_LOW			0xa6
> > +#define OV10640_ID_HIGH			0xa6
> > +#define OV10640_CHIP_ID			0x300a
> >  #define OV10640_PIXEL_RATE		55000000
> >
> >  struct rdacm21_device {
> > @@ -306,6 +329,39 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_ops rdacm21_subdev_ops = {
> >  	.pad		= &rdacm21_subdev_pad_ops,
> >  };
> >
> > +static int ov10640_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
> > +{
> > +	u8 val;
> > +
> > +	/* Power-up OV10640 by setting RESETB and PWDNB pins high. */
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_SEL0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_SEL1, OV490_SPWDN0);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION1, OV490_SPWDN0);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0, OV490_SPWDN0);
> > +	usleep_range(3000, 5000);
>
> So the OV490 firmware doesn't handle this ?
>

Do you mean the delay or the reset of the ov10640 ?

I need the delay here otherwise reading the ov10640 id fails below.
Same for the reset :)

About reset, it seems it does not... The ov490 settings are loaded
from an EEPROM but I don't know what it content is, maybe it's just
about the imaging-related settings ?

> > +
> > +	/* Read OV10640 ID to test communications. */
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_READ);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_HIGH, OV10640_CHIP_ID >> 8);
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_LOW, (u8)OV10640_CHIP_ID);
> > +
> > +	/* Trigger SCCB slave transaction and give it some time to complete. */
> > +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_HOST_CMD, OV490_HOST_CMD_TRIGGER);
> > +	usleep_range(1000, 1500);
> > +
> > +	ov490_read_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR, &val);
> > +	if (val != OV10640_ID_HIGH) {
> > +		dev_err(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID mismatch: (0x%02x)\n", val);
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +	}
>
> Would it make sense to create an ov490_sensor_read() helper ?
>

While developing this I went and also tested reading other registers
of the ov10640 and I had contradictory results. I'm mostly wondering
if OV490_HOST_CMD_TRIGGER is correct in all cases, as I have some BSP
code that uses a different value.

Can we wait for an helper until we have more users ?

Thanks
  j

> > +
> > +	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID = 0x%2x\n", val);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int ov490_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	u8 pid, ver, val;
> > @@ -349,20 +405,11 @@ static int ov490_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
> >  		return -ENODEV;
> >  	}
> >
> > -	/* Read OV10640 Id to test communications. */
> > -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195000, 0x01);
> > -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195001, 0x30);
> > -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195002, 0x0a);
> > -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x808000c0, 0xc1);
> > -
> > -	ov490_read_reg(dev, 0x80195000, &val);
> > -	if (val != OV10640_ID_LOW) {
> > -		dev_err(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID mismatch: (0x%02x)\n", val);
> > -		return -ENODEV;
> > -	}
> > -
> > -	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID = 0x%2x\n", val);
> > +	ret = ov10640_initialize(dev);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> >
> > +	/* Program OV490 with register-value table. */
> >  	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ov490_regs_wizard); ++i) {
> >  		ret = ov490_write(dev, ov490_regs_wizard[i].reg,
> >  				  ov490_regs_wizard[i].val);
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart