linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] drm/msm/dpu: add support for SM8550

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: <de3860ba-40f9-cdd5-097c-e015f6b19255@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 11:08:26 +0100
From:   Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
To:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] drm/msm/dpu: add support for SM8550

On 04/01/2023 10:45, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 04/01/2023 11:08, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Add definitions for the display hardware used on Qualcomm SM8550
>> platform.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 197 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.h |   1 +
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_mdss.h    |   2 +
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c        |   1 +
>>   4 files changed, 201 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>> index b4ca123d8e69..adf5e25269dc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c

<snip>

>> @@ -776,6 +821,45 @@ static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sm8450_ctl[] = {
>>       },
>>   };
>> +static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sm8550_ctl[] = {
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_0", .id = CTL_0,
>> +    .base = 0x15000, .len = 0x290,?
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
> 
> CTL_SC7280_MASK | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) ?

Indeed DPU_CTL_VM_CFG is missing, will switch to that.

> 
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 9),
>> +    },
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_1", .id = CTL_1,
>> +    .base = 0x16000, .len = 0x290,
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 10),
>> +    },
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_2", .id = CTL_2,
>> +    .base = 0x17000, .len = 0x290,
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
> 
> CTL_SC7280_MASK?

Ack

> 
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 11),
>> +    },
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_3", .id = CTL_3,
>> +    .base = 0x18000, .len = 0x290,
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 12),
>> +    },
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_4", .id = CTL_4,
>> +    .base = 0x19000, .len = 0x290,
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 13),
>> +    },
>> +    {
>> +    .name = "ctl_5", .id = CTL_5,
>> +    .base = 0x1a000, .len = 0x290,
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
>> +    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 23),
>> +    },
>> +};
>> +
>>   static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sc7280_ctl[] = {
>>       {
>>       .name = "ctl_0", .id = CTL_0,

<snip>

>> @@ -1268,6 +1386,16 @@ static const struct dpu_pingpong_sub_blks sc7280_pp_sblk = {
>>       .len = 0x20, .version = 0x20000},
>>   };
>> +#define PP_BLK_DIPHER(_name, _id, _base, _merge_3d, _sblk, _done, _rdptr) \
>> +    {\
>> +    .name = _name, .id = _id, \
>> +    .base = _base, .len = 0, \
> 
> len = 0 looks incorrect. Any particular reason why can't we use plain PP_BLK here?

The TE block has been moved to the DSI INTF blocks since SM8350 I think, or earlier.

This removes the DPU_PINGPONG_DITHER feature used downstream to enable the PP TE callbacks.

Since there's only the DIPHER sub-block remaining, this is why I set len to 0.

> 
>> +    .features = BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DITHER), \
>> +    .merge_3d = _merge_3d, \
>> +    .sblk = &_sblk, \
>> +    .intr_done = _done, \
>> +    .intr_rdptr = _rdptr, \
>> +    }
>>   #define PP_BLK_TE(_name, _id, _base, _merge_3d, _sblk, _done, _rdptr) \
>>       {\
>>       .name = _name, .id = _id, \

<snip>