[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c9c324aa-6192-f878-9189-635626e76b13@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:28:51 +0530
From: Dikshita Agarwal <quic_dikshita@...cinc.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@...il.com>,
Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
"Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Dikshita Agarwal <dikshita@....qualcomm.com>,
Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
Dikshita Agarwal <dikshita@...eaurora.org>,
Mansur Alisha Shaik <mansur@...eaurora.org>,
Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
CC: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Vikash Garodia" <vgarodia@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/18] media: venus: hfi_venus: Sanitize venus_boot_core()
per-VPU-version
On 3/2/2023 4:40 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
> On 2.03.2023 12:00, Dikshita Agarwal wrote:
>> On 2/28/2023 8:54 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> The current assumption of IS_V6 is overgeneralized. Adjust the logic
>>> to take the VPU hardware version into account.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c | 10 ++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c
>>> index 4ccf31147c2a..772e5e9cf127 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/hfi_venus.c
>>> @@ -448,20 +448,21 @@ static int venus_boot_core(struct venus_hfi_device *hdev)
>>> {
>>> struct device *dev = hdev->core->dev;
>>> static const unsigned int max_tries = 100;
>>> - u32 ctrl_status = 0, mask_val;
>>> + u32 ctrl_status = 0, mask_val = 0;
>>> unsigned int count = 0;
>>> void __iomem *cpu_cs_base = hdev->core->cpu_cs_base;
>>> void __iomem *wrapper_base = hdev->core->wrapper_base;
>>> int ret = 0;
>>> writel(BIT(VIDC_CTRL_INIT_CTRL_SHIFT), cpu_cs_base + VIDC_CTRL_INIT);
>>> - if (IS_V6(hdev->core)) {
>>> + if (IS_IRIS1(hdev->core) || IS_IRIS2(hdev->core) || IS_IRIS2_1(hdev->core)) {
>> I think the IRIS1 check can be removed from here as we are not handling IRIS1 related things at other places.
>>
>> we can add the required checks for IRIS1 when we add support for any IRIS1 based chipset.
> Up to you really, I plan on getting IRIS1 (SM8150) supported and have
> some mumbling going on for that on my local branch. FWIW these checks
> are logically correct and I would personally prefer not to have to go
> through each one of them and remove them just to bring them back soon.
>
> Konrad
oh, I see. I wasn't aware about the plan for IRIS1.
if you plan to add these checks on all relevant places then it should be
fine.
Thanks,
Dikshita
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dikshita
>>
>>> mask_val = readl(wrapper_base + WRAPPER_INTR_MASK);
>>> mask_val &= ~(WRAPPER_INTR_MASK_A2HWD_BASK_V6 |
>>> WRAPPER_INTR_MASK_A2HCPU_MASK);
>>> } else {
>>> mask_val = WRAPPER_INTR_MASK_A2HVCODEC_MASK;
>>> }
>>> +
>>> writel(mask_val, wrapper_base + WRAPPER_INTR_MASK);
>>> writel(1, cpu_cs_base + CPU_CS_SCIACMDARG3);
>>> @@ -480,10 +481,11 @@ static int venus_boot_core(struct venus_hfi_device *hdev)
>>> if (count >= max_tries)
>>> ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
>>> - if (IS_V6(hdev->core)) {
>>> + if (IS_AR50_LITE(hdev->core) || IS_IRIS2(hdev->core) || IS_IRIS2_1(hdev->core))
>>> writel(0x1, cpu_cs_base + CPU_CS_H2XSOFTINTEN_V6);
>>> +
>>> + if (IS_IRIS2(hdev->core) || IS_IRIS2_1(hdev->core))
>>> writel(0x0, cpu_cs_base + CPU_CS_X2RPMH_V6);
>>> - }
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists