| 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: <X/+A7btfIZpdktrL@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 01:23:25 +0200
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>
Cc: kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com,
niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hyun Kwon <hyunk@...inx.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
sergei.shtylyov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/7] fixup! media: i2c: rdacm21: Break-out ov10640
initialization
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@...ndi.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.
> +#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 ?
> +
> + /* 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 ?
> +
> + 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists