linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: imx: imx7-media-csi: add support for imx8mq

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
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YZU+vmVBNygdHM1E@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 19:41:18 +0200
From:   Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To:     Rui Miguel Silva <rmfrfs@...il.com>
Cc:     Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@...i.sm>, mchehab@...nel.org,
        robh@...nel.org, shawnguo@...nel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        kernel@...i.sm, linux-imx@....com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: imx: imx7-media-csi: add support for imx8mq

Hi Rui,

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 05:36:49PM +0000, Rui Miguel Silva wrote:
> On Wed Nov 17, 2021 at 5:16 PM WET, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 02:51:48PM +0000, Rui Miguel Silva wrote:
> > > Hi Martin,
> > > Thanks for the patch.
> > > 
> > > On Wed Nov 17, 2021 at 9:27 AM WET, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Modeled after the NXP driver mx6s_capture.c that this driver is based on,
> > > > imx8mq needs different settings for the baseaddr_switch mechanism. Define
> > > > the needed bits and set that for imx8mq.
> > > >
> > > > Without these settings, the system will "sometimes" hang completely when
> > > > starting to stream (the interrupt will never be called).
> >
> > Do we know why ? Are all the bits that you set required ?
> >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@...i.sm>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/staging/media/imx/imx7-media-csi.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/imx/imx7-media-csi.c b/drivers/staging/media/imx/imx7-media-csi.c
> > > > index 2288dadb2683..8619cf2fc694 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/staging/media/imx/imx7-media-csi.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/imx/imx7-media-csi.c
> > > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> > > >  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/module.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/of_graph.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > > > @@ -122,6 +123,10 @@
> > > >  #define BIT_DATA_FROM_MIPI		BIT(22)
> > > >  #define BIT_MIPI_YU_SWAP		BIT(21)
> > > >  #define BIT_MIPI_DOUBLE_CMPNT		BIT(20)
> > > > +#define BIT_MASK_OPTION_FIRST_FRAME	(0 << 18)
> > > > +#define BIT_MASK_OPTION_CSI_EN		(1 << 18)
> > > > +#define BIT_MASK_OPTION_SECOND_FRAME	(2 << 18)
> > > > +#define BIT_MASK_OPTION_ON_DATA		(3 << 18)
> > > >  #define BIT_BASEADDR_CHG_ERR_EN		BIT(9)
> > > >  #define BIT_BASEADDR_SWITCH_SEL		BIT(5)
> > > >  #define BIT_BASEADDR_SWITCH_EN		BIT(4)
> > > > @@ -154,6 +159,12 @@
> > > >  #define CSI_CSICR18			0x48
> > > >  #define CSI_CSICR19			0x4c
> > > >  
> > > > +enum imx_soc {
> > > > +	IMX6UL = 0,
> > > > +	IMX7,
> > > > +	IMX8MQ,
> > > 
> > > maybe instead of this enum we could use a bool in structure...
> >
> > An enum would be more extensible, but we shouldn't define different
> > values for IMX6UL and IMX7 if they're compatible. Maybe an enum
> > imx_csi_model with two values (IMX_CSI_IMX7 and IMX_CSI_IMX8MQ ?).
> 
> If there are only 2 possible values, for now, I think a enum would be
> overkill. But do not have a strong feeling about it. So, an enum it is
> more extensible and ok too, but with the IMX_CSI or even better 
> IMX7_CSI prefix.

I won't push strongly in one direction or another, I just have a slight
preference for an enum, as it integrates better with device match data.

> > Are there other SoCs in the i.MX8 family that require this ? The BSP
> > driver sets the baseaddr switch mechanism for i.MX8MM too, but it seems
> > to work fine without it.
> >
> > > >+};
> > > > +
> > > >  struct imx7_csi {
> > > >  	struct device *dev;
> > > >  	struct v4l2_subdev sd;
> > > > @@ -189,6 +200,8 @@ struct imx7_csi {
> > > >  	bool is_csi2;
> > > >  
> > > >  	struct completion last_eof_completion;
> > > > +
> > > > +	enum imx_soc type;
> > > 
> > > here, bool is_imx8mq?
> > > 
> > > >  };
> > > >  
> > > >  static struct imx7_csi *
> > > > @@ -537,6 +550,16 @@ static void imx7_csi_deinit(struct imx7_csi *csi,
> > > >  	clk_disable_unprepare(csi->mclk);
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > +static void imx8mq_baseaddr_switch(struct imx7_csi *csi)
> > > 
> > > I think this function needs a better name. First add the imx7_csi
> > > prefix that all functions have, and also you are setting it specific
> > > to second frame and the function should not be specific to imx8.
> > > 
> > > maybe something:
> > > 
> > > imx7_csi_write_on_second_frame_enable, maybe?
> > > 
> > > > +{
> > > > +	u32 cr18 = imx7_csi_reg_read(csi, CSI_CSICR18);
> > > > +
> > > > +	cr18 |= BIT_BASEADDR_SWITCH_EN | BIT_BASEADDR_SWITCH_SEL |
> > > > +		BIT_BASEADDR_CHG_ERR_EN;
> > > > +	cr18 |= BIT_MASK_OPTION_SECOND_FRAME;
> > > > +	imx7_csi_reg_write(csi, cr18, CSI_CSICR18);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > >  static void imx7_csi_enable(struct imx7_csi *csi)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	/* Clear the Rx FIFO and reflash the DMA controller. */
> > > > @@ -551,7 +574,11 @@ static void imx7_csi_enable(struct imx7_csi *csi)
> > > >  
> > > >  	/* Enable the RxFIFO DMA and the CSI. */
> > > >  	imx7_csi_dmareq_rff_enable(csi);
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > unrelated new line.
> > > 
> > > >  	imx7_csi_hw_enable(csi);
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (csi->type == IMX8MQ)
> > > > +		imx8mq_baseaddr_switch(csi);
> > > 
> > > change this to new types and names?
> > > 
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  static void imx7_csi_disable(struct imx7_csi *csi)
> > > > @@ -1155,6 +1182,8 @@ static int imx7_csi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >  	if (IS_ERR(csi->regbase))
> > > >  		return PTR_ERR(csi->regbase);
> > > >  
> > > > +	csi->type = (enum imx_soc)of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> > > 
> > > here something:
> > >         csi->is_imx8mq = of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,imx8mq-csi");
> > >
> > > > +
> > > >  	spin_lock_init(&csi->irqlock);
> > > >  	mutex_init(&csi->lock);
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -1249,8 +1278,9 @@ static int imx7_csi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  static const struct of_device_id imx7_csi_of_match[] = {
> > > > -	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx7-csi" },
> > > > -	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6ul-csi" },
> > > > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx8mq-csi", .data = (void *)IMX8MQ },
> > > 
> > > and with the above you should not need to add the data field here.
> >
> > I like match data personally (especially if we keep a device model
> > enum). This is exactly what match data has been designed for, to avoid
> > is_compatible() checks.
> 
> agree.
> 
> > > > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx7-csi", .data = (void *)IMX7 },
> > > > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6ul-csi", .data = (void *)IMX6UL },
> > > >  	{ },
> > > >  };
> > > >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, imx7_csi_of_match);

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart