[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0193f6b6-0019-3080-2615-02225eb4bf3b@collabora.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:27:17 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@...iatek.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>
Cc: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...omium.org>, tfiga@...omium.org,
drinkcat@...omium.org, pihsun@...omium.org, hsinyi@...gle.com,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...labora.com>,
daoyuan huang <daoyuan.huang@...iatek.com>,
Ping-Hsun Wu <ping-hsun.wu@...iatek.com>,
allen-kh.cheng@...iatek.com, xiandong.wang@...iatek.com,
randy.wu@...iatek.com, jason-jh.lin@...iatek.com,
roy-cw.yeh@...iatek.com, river.cheng@...iatek.com,
srv_heupstream@...iatek.com,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 1/6] soc: mediatek: mutex: add common interface to
accommodate multiple modules operationg MUTEX
Il 11/04/22 09:23, Moudy Ho ha scritto:
> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
>
> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@...iatek.com>
> Change-Id: I6a2ab74fccf36248165ce4a6b268d82a1177afc9
> ---
> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 21 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 110 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> index aaf8fc1abb43..48a04dce50d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> @@ -156,6 +156,8 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
> const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
> + const unsigned int *mutex_table_mod;
> + const unsigned int *mutex_table_sof;
> const bool no_clk;
> };
>
> @@ -445,6 +447,54 @@ void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_add_comp);
>
Hello Moudy,
Some critical things, and one cleanup.
First of all, the commit title is very long, and it also contains a typo.
I would go for something like
"soc: mediatek: mutex: Add common interface for modules setting".
Also, please remove your internal "Change-Id" tag, this is meaningless on
upstream, hence not applicable here.
Now for the cleanup: I have an idea to make this a bit shorter (and please
feel free to change function names with something more appropriate, if needed):
static int mtk_mutex_write_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx,
bool clear)
{
> +{
> + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
> + mutex[mutex->id]);
> + unsigned int reg;
> + unsigned int offset;
> +
> + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
> +
> + if (idx < MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0 ||
> + idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX) {
> + dev_err(mtx->dev, "Not supported MOD table index : %d", idx);
> + return;
return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg,
> + mutex->id);
> +
> + reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
if (clear)
reg &= ~BIT(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx])
else
reg |= BIT(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx])
> + reg |= 1 << mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx];
> + writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
> +}
int mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
{
return mtk_mutex_write_mod(mutex, idx, false);
}
int mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
{
return mtk_mutex_clear_mod(mutex, idx, true);
}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_mod);
> +
> +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
> +{
> + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
> + mutex[mutex->id]);
> + unsigned int sof_id;
> +
> + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
> +
> + if (idx < MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0 ||
> + idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX) {
> + dev_err(mtx->dev, "Not supported SOF table index : %d", idx);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + sof_id = mtx->data->mutex_table_sof[idx];
... same changes here, except we'd have something like
if (clear)
val = MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE;
else
val = mtx->data->mutex_sof[sof_id];
writel_relaxed(val, ...etc)
but feel free to give me valid reasons to not use this approach.
In any case, the code looks ok to me.
Regards,
Angelo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists