[PATCH v9 10/18] drm: bridge: samsung-dsim: Init exynos host for first DSI transfer
Jagan Teki
jagan at amarulasolutions.com
Wed Dec 14 00:23:36 PST 2022
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 1:34 PM Marek Szyprowski
<m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
>
> On 14.12.2022 06:33, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 9:11 PM Marek Szyprowski
> > <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >> On 13.12.2022 16:15, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 8:24 PM Marek Szyprowski
> >>> <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 13.12.2022 15:18, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 7:31 PM Marek Szyprowski
> >>>>> <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 13.12.2022 13:20, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 13.12.2022 11:40, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 2:28 PM Marek Szyprowski
> >>>>>>>> <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 12.12.2022 16:33, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 8:52 PM Marek Szyprowski
> >>>>>>>>> <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 12.12.2022 09:43, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 12.12.2022 09:32, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 1:56 PM Marek Szyprowski
> >>>>>>>>> <m.szyprowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Jagan,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 09.12.2022 16:23, Jagan Teki wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The existing drm panels and bridges in Exynos required host
> >>>>>>>>> initialization during the first DSI command transfer even though
> >>>>>>>>> the initialization was done before.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This host reinitialization is handled via DSIM_STATE_REINITIALIZED
> >>>>>>>>> flag and triggers from host transfer.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Do this exclusively for Exynos.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Initial logic is derived from Marek Szyprowski changes.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski at samsung.com>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan at amarulasolutions.com>
> >>>>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>>> Changes from v9:
> >>>>>>>>> - derived from v8
> >>>>>>>>> - added comments
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> >>>>>>>>> include/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.h | 5 +++--
> >>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The following chunk is missing compared to v8:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> index 6e9ad955ebd3..6a9403cb92ae 100644
> >>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -1315,7 +1315,9 @@ static int samsung_dsim_init(struct samsung_dsim
> >>>>>>>>> *dsi, unsigned int flag)
> >>>>>>>>> return 0;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> samsung_dsim_reset(dsi);
> >>>>>>>>> - samsung_dsim_enable_irq(dsi);
> >>>>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>>>> + if (!(dsi->state & DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED))
> >>>>>>>>> + samsung_dsim_enable_irq(dsi);
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is this really required? does it make sure that the IRQ does not
> >>>>>>>>> enable twice?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> That's what that check does. Without the 'if (!(dsi->state &
> >>>>>>>>> DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED))' check, the irqs will be enabled twice (first
> >>>>>>>>> from pre_enable, then from the first transfer), what leads to a
> >>>>>>>>> warning from irq core.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I've just noticed that we also would need to clear the
> >>>>>>>>> DSIM_STATE_REINITIALIZED flag in dsim_suspend.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> However I've found that a bit simpler patch would keep the current code
> >>>>>>>>> flow for Exynos instead of this reinitialization hack. This can be
> >>>>>>>>> applied on the "[PATCH v9 09/18] drm: bridge: samsung-dsim: Add host
> >>>>>>>>> init in pre_enable" patch:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> index 0b2e52585485..acc95c61ae45 100644
> >>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>>>>> @@ -1291,9 +1291,11 @@ static void
> >>>>>>>>> samsung_dsim_atomic_pre_enable(struct
> >>>>>>>>> drm_bridge *bridge,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> dsi->state |= DSIM_STATE_ENABLED;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> - ret = samsung_dsim_init(dsi, DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED);
> >>>>>>>>> - if (ret)
> >>>>>>>>> - return;
> >>>>>>>>> + if (!samsung_dsim_hw_is_exynos(dsi->plat_data->hw_type)) {
> >>>>>>>>> + ret = samsung_dsim_init(dsi, DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED);
> >>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
> >>>>>>>>> + return;
> >>>>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sorry, I don't understand this. Does it mean Exynos doesn't need to
> >>>>>>>>> init host in pre_enable? If I remember correctly even though the host
> >>>>>>>>> is initialized it has to reinitialize during the first transfer - This
> >>>>>>>>> is what the Exynos requirement is. Please correct or explain here.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This is a matter of enabling power regulator(s) in the right order
> >>>>>>>>> and doing the host initialization in the right moment. It was never
> >>>>>>>>> a matter of re-initialization. See the current code for the
> >>>>>>>>> reference (it uses the same approach as my above change). I've
> >>>>>>>>> already explained that here:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/e96197f9-948a-997e-5453-9f9d179b5f5a@samsung.com/
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If you would like to see the exact proper moment of the dsi host
> >>>>>>>>> initialization on the Exynos see the code here:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=5dc33900-0258001f-5dc2b24f-000babdfecba-f7c1a2a1905c83ca&q=1&e=f086bfdb-9055-48bd-b9c2-5dffb6c0d558&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmszyprow%2Flinux%2Ftree%2Fv5.18-next-20220511-dsi-rework
> >>>>>>>>> and patches adding mipi_dsi_host_init() to panel/bridge drivers.
> >>>>>>>> As I said before, the downstream bridge needs an explicit call to host
> >>>>>>>> init via mipi_dsi_host_init - this is indeed not a usual use-case
> >>>>>>>> scenario. Let's handle this with a REINIT fix and see if we can update
> >>>>>>>> this later to handle both scenarios.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Would you please test this repo, I have included all.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://gitlab.com/openedev/kernel/-/commits/imx8mm-dsi-v10
> >>>>>>> This doesn't work on TM2e board. Give me some time to find why...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> The following change is missing in "drm: bridge: Generalize Exynos-DSI
> >>>>>> driver into a Samsung DSIM bridge" patch:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>> index 1dbff2bee93f..81828b5ee0ac 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> >>>>>> @@ -1745,6 +1745,7 @@ int samsung_dsim_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>>>>> dsi->bridge.funcs = &samsung_dsim_bridge_funcs;
> >>>>>> dsi->bridge.of_node = dev->of_node;
> >>>>>> dsi->bridge.type = DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_DSI;
> >>>>>> + dsi->bridge.pre_enable_prev_first = true;
> >>>>> Can you check this and confirm, I keep this in exynos side.
> >>>>> https://gitlab.com/openedev/kernel/-/commit/ccb02df7a313fdf91d8e116b0ec3d6c945fbb6fd#c93f0ce4d81b854fbde970e341fb307f1be78c16_1865_189
> >>>> This one is fine!
> >>>>
> >>>>>> /* DE_LOW: i.MX8M Mini/Nano LCDIF-DSIM glue logic inverts
> >>>>>> HS/VS/DE */
> >>>>>> if (dsi->plat_data->hw_type == DSIM_TYPE_IMX8MM)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After adding the above, all my test platform works fine.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> BTW, I still think that it is worth replacing the "drm: exynos: dsi: Add
> >>>>>> host initialization in pre_enable" patch with the following simple
> >>>>>> change and propagate it to bridge/samsung-dsim.c:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> >>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> >>>>>> index fdaf514b39f2..071b74d60dcb 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> >>>>>> @@ -254,6 +254,9 @@ struct exynos_dsi_transfer {
> >>>>>> #define DSIM_STATE_CMD_LPM BIT(2)
> >>>>>> #define DSIM_STATE_VIDOUT_AVAILABLE BIT(3)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +#define exynos_dsi_hw_is_exynos(hw) \
> >>>>>> + ((hw) >= DSIM_TYPE_EXYNOS3250 && (hw) <= DSIM_TYPE_EXYNOS5433)
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> enum exynos_dsi_type {
> >>>>>> DSIM_TYPE_EXYNOS3250,
> >>>>>> DSIM_TYPE_EXYNOS4210,
> >>>>>> @@ -1344,6 +1347,9 @@ static int exynos_dsi_init(struct exynos_dsi *dsi)
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>> const struct exynos_dsi_driver_data *driver_data =
> >>>>>> dsi->driver_data;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> + if (dsi->state & DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED)
> >>>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> exynos_dsi_reset(dsi);
> >>>>>> exynos_dsi_enable_irq(dsi);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> @@ -1356,6 +1362,8 @@ static int exynos_dsi_init(struct exynos_dsi *dsi)
> >>>>>> exynos_dsi_set_phy_ctrl(dsi);
> >>>>>> exynos_dsi_init_link(dsi);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> + dsi->state |= DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED;
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> return 0;
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> @@ -1411,6 +1419,12 @@ static void exynos_dsi_atomic_pre_enable(struct
> >>>>>> drm_bridge *bridge,
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> dsi->state |= DSIM_STATE_ENABLED;
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> + if (!exynos_dsi_hw_is_exynos(dsi->plat_data->hw_type)) {
> >>>>>> + ret = exynos_dsi_init(dsi);
> >>>>>> + if (ret)
> >>>>>> + return;
> >>>>>> + }
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> static void exynos_dsi_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
> >>>>>> @@ -1557,12 +1571,9 @@ static ssize_t exynos_dsi_host_transfer(struct
> >>>>>> mipi_dsi_host *host,
> >>>>>> if (!(dsi->state & DSIM_STATE_ENABLED))
> >>>>>> return -EINVAL;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - if (!(dsi->state & DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED)) {
> >>>>>> - ret = exynos_dsi_init(dsi);
> >>>>>> - if (ret)
> >>>>>> - return ret;
> >>>>>> - dsi->state |= DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED;
> >>>>>> - }
> >>>>>> + ret = exynos_dsi_init(dsi);
> >>>>>> + if (ret)
> >>>>>> + return ret;
> >>>>> Below patch handling similar behavior by checking exynos hw_type at
> >>>>> exynos_dsi_init, isn't it? Please check and let me know if I missing
> >>>>> anything.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://gitlab.com/openedev/kernel/-/commit/d19d491eef92b92e12a26265697274ce666eddb5
> >>>> You don't miss anything. Your version also works, but I just proposed a
> >>>> bit simpler code.
> >>> Do your changes don't need a DSIM_STATE_REINITIALIZED flag? would you
> >>> please share the change on top of this commit?
> >>> https://gitlab.com/openedev/kernel/-/commit/d19d491eef92b92e12a26265697274ce666eddb5
> >> It doesn't need the DSIM_STATE_REINITIALIZED flag because the
> >> initialization is done only once - in pre_enable for non-Exynos case and
> >> on the first transfer for the Exynos case. In both cases the same flag
> >> (DSIM_STATE_INITIALIZED) is used.
> >>
> >> See the attached patch.
> > Thanks, I have included the changes and added your authorship as well.
> >
> > Please test this final version and let me know if you have any comments.
> > https://gitlab.com/openedev/kernel/-/commits/imx8mm-dsi-v10
>
>
> Fine for me.
Thanks, I will send V10.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list