[PATCH v4 0/5] powervr: MT8173 GPU support

[Brian Masney]

Hi Angelo and Chen-Yu,

On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 10:23:14AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> On 7/30/26 06:51, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 10:33 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> > <angelogioacchino.delregno at collabora.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 7/28/26 15:13, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 9:10 PM Brian Masney <bmasney at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 05:17:58PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This is v4 of my MT8173 PowerVR GPU support series.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This time around Mesa was ready for basic testing, using both vulkanmark
> > > > > > and glmark2-es2-drm (with Zink). Details below.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Changes since v3 (all in the clk driver patch):
> > > > > > - Changed pm_runtime_put() to pm_runtime_put_sync()
> > > > > > - Added missing of_node_put() in remove function
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Changes since v2 (all in the clk driver patch):
> > > > > > - Made COMMON_CLK_MT8173_MFGTOP depend on PM
> > > > > >     - Needed since the driver implements PM domains using the generic PM
> > > > > >       domain library, which also depends on PM
> > > > > >     - Fixes build breakage (kernel test robot)
> > > > > > - Fixed "RST_DELAY_CNT" name (Brian)
> > > > > > - Dropped unused mfg_desc (Brian)
> > > > > > - Added check of clk_prepare_enable()'s return value in
> > > > > >     clk_mt8173_mfgtop_power_on() (Brian)
> > > > > > - Saved error value for return in IS_ERR(data->clk_26m) branch
> > > > > >     (Dan Carpenter / kernel test robot w/ smatch)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Changes since v1:
> > > > > > - Adapted to changed DT bindings
> > > > > > - Dropped driver change
> > > > > > - Use same power domain for "a" and "b" GPU power domains
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This series enables the PowerVR GPU found in the MT8173 SoC, found in
> > > > > > some Chromebooks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm making a pull for Stephen for the clk changes. Should patches 1,2,4
> > > > > go through the clk tree? Patches 3,5 go through the DRM tree?
> > > > 
> > > > Only patches 1 and 2 should go through the clock tree.
> > > > 
> > > > Patch 3, 4, 5 can all go through the soc tree if Angelo wants to pick up
> > > > DT binding patches. Otherwise I can push patch 3 through drm-misc.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Not sure if I can really take the DRM bindings patch through soc.
> > > 
> > > I will take the devicetree ones exactly right now, even though it's going to
> > > give warnings.
> > 
> > Apologies for missing this, but the first DT patch depends on the clk DT
> > bindings patch for the clk ID macros. This is causing build errors in
> > linux-next right now.
> > 
> > Not sure how we can fix this right now.
> > 
> > Brian, would it be possible for you to split out that patch into a
> > separate immutable branch for Angelo to merge?

Yes, I can split things out and make an immutable branch this morning.
But it sounds too late for that.

> > 
> > Otherwise Angelo might need to drop the DT patches until the next cycle.
>
> Yeah, that's so bad.
> I'd be happy to be able to resolve this, but it's too late on my side.
> 
> I should've checked the DT patches more carefully, my bad: I got a bit too excited
> to finally see this PowerVR stuff working on MT8173 and going upstream.
> 
> Sadly, I have to drop the devicetree patches :-(

Chen-Yu: Could Angelo add an Acked-by to the three patches, and then I send
Stephen an additional pull with just those patches? Do you think he'd
pull that?

Brian