| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <2dab7233-139f-b148-2f5e-40a32b3dc797@rock-chips.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 01:32:48 +0800
From: Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@...k-chips.com>
To: Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
heiko@...ech.de, mark.rutland@....com, airlied@...ux.ie
Cc: hl@...k-chips.com, zyw@...k-chips.comg, briannorris@...omium.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, xbl@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] dt-bindings: add the rockchip, dual-channel for
dw-mipi-dsi
Hi Archit,
On 2017年10月26日 12:53, Archit Taneja wrote:
>
>
> On 10/25/2017 09:21 AM, Nickey Yang wrote:
>> Configure dsi slave channel when driving a panel
>> which needs 2 DSI links.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@...k-chips.com>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip.txt | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip.txt
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip.txt
>>
>> index 6bb59ab..a2bea22 100644
>> ---
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip.txt
>> +++
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip.txt
>> @@ -19,6 +19,8 @@ Optional properties:
>> - power-domains: a phandle to mipi dsi power domain node.
>> - resets: list of phandle + reset specifier pairs, as described in
>> [3].
>> - reset-names: string reset name, must be "apb".
>> +- rockchip,dual-channel: phandle to a 2nd DSI channel, useful as a
>> slave
>> +channel when driving a panel which needs 2 DSI links.
> The example below is how dual DSI bindings could look like. Let me
> know what
> you think of it.
>
> If both DSI outputs drive the same device (i.e, point to the same
> panel DT
> node), then I think it's reasonable enough to assume that the DSIs are
> operating in a 'dual-channel' mode. That being said, we still need DT to
> describe which of the DSIs generates the clock for both the channels.
> This
> is done with the 'clock-master' DT binding.
>
> Thanks,
> Archit
>
> mipi_dsi: mipi@...60000 {
> ...
> ...
>
> clock-master; /* implies that this DSI instance drivers the clock
> * for both the DSIs.
> */
>
> ports {
> mipi_in: port {
> ...
> ...
> };
>
> /* add extra output ports for both DSIs */
> mipi_out: port {
> mipi_panel_out: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint = <&panel_in_channel0>;
> };
> };
> };
>
> panel {
> ...
> ...
> /*
> * panel node can describe its input ports, if both the DSIs
> output
> * ports are connected to the same device (i.e, the same DSI
> panel),
> * we can assume that the DSIs need to operate in dual DSI mode
> */
> ports {
> ...
> port@0 {
> panel_in_channel0: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint = <&mipi_panel_out>;
> };
> };
>
> port@1 {
> panel_in_channel1: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint = <&mipi1_panel_out>;
> };
>
> };
> };
> };
> };
>
>
> mipi_dsi1: mipi@...68000 {
> ...
> ...
>
> ports {
> mipi1_in: port {
> ...
> ...
> };
>
> mipi1_out: port {
> mipi1_panel_out: endpoint {
> remote-endpoint = <&panel_in_channel1>;
> };
> };
> };
> };
>
I try to follow as you suggested,use
mipi_dsi: mipi@...60000 {
...
...
clock-master; /* implies that this DSI instance drivers the clock
* for both the DSIs.
*/
ports {
mipi_in: port {
...
...
};
/* add extra output ports for both DSIs */
mipi_out: port {
mipi_panel_out: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&panel_in_channel0>;
};
};
};
panel {
...
...
/*
* panel node can describe its input ports, if both the DSIs output
* ports are connected to the same device (i.e, the same DSI
panel),
* we can assume that the DSIs need to operate in dual DSI mode
*/
ports {
...
port@0 {
panel_in_channel0: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&mipi_panel_out>;
};
};
port@1 {
panel_in_channel1: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&mipi1_panel_out>;
};
};
};
};
};
mipi_dsi1: mipi@...68000 {
...
...
ports {
mipi1_in: port {
...
...
};
mipi1_out: port {
mipi1_panel_out: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&panel_in_channel1>;
};
};
};
}
But it seems we can not use of_drm_find_panel(like below)
/*
port = of_graph_get_port_by_id(dev->of_node, 1);
if (port) {
endpoint = of_get_child_by_name(port, "endpoint");
of_node_put(port);
if (!endpoint) {
dev_err(dev, "no output endpoint found\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
panel_node = of_graph_get_remote_port_parent(endpoint);
of_node_put(endpoint);
if (!panel_node) {
dev_err(dev, "no output node found\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
panel = of_drm_find_panel(panel_node);
of_node_put(panel_node);
if (!panel)
return -EPROBE_DEFER;
}
*/
to get DSI1 outputs,because of_drm_find_panel need compare
if (panel->dev->of_node == np)
in dsi_panel driver innolux->base.dev = &innolux->link->dev;
dsi->dev
struct innolux_panel {
struct drm_panel base;
struct mipi_dsi_device *link;
};
It means one panel can only be found in his dsi node,(like dsi0 above).
I'm doubting about it, Or may we follow tegra_dsi_ganged_probe
(drivers/gpu/drm/tergra/dsi.c) method.
Thanks,
Nickey
>> [1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
>> [2] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists