linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 08/11] drm/msm/dsi: Add support for SM8750

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: <4adeffe7-ca07-4441-86fe-10a4891b7b4b@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 12:34:28 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Abhinav Kumar
 <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
 Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krishna Manikandan <quic_mkrishn@...cinc.com>,
 Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Srini Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/11] drm/msm/dsi: Add support for SM8750

On 13/01/2025 13:13, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:02:54PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 13/01/2025 09:29, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 01:43:28PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 10/01/2025 10:17, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 09:59:26AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/01/2025 00:18, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 02:08:35PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> Add support for DSI PHY v7.0 on Qualcomm SM8750 SoC which comes with two
>>>>>>>> differences worth noting:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. ICODE_ACCUM_STATUS_LOW and ALOG_OBSV_BUS_STATUS_1 registers - their
>>>>>>>>    offsets were just switched.  Currently these registers are not used
>>>>>>>>    in the driver, so the easiest is to document both but keep them
>>>>>>>>    commented out to avoid conflict.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. DSI PHY PLLs, the parents of pixel and byte clocks, cannot be used as
>>>>>>>>    parents before they are prepared and initial rate is set.  Therefore
>>>>>>>>    assigned-clock-parents are not working here and driver is responsible
>>>>>>>>    for reparenting clocks with proper procedure: see dsi_clk_init_6g_v2_9().
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Isn't it a description of CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE and/or
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No - must be gated accross reparent - so opposite.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but does not work. Probably enabling parent, before
>>>>>> assigned-clocks-parents, happens still too early:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [    1.623554] DSI PLL(0) lock failed, status=0x00000000
>>>>>> [    1.623556] PLL(0) lock failed
>>>>>> [    1.624650] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>>>> [    1.624651] disp_cc_mdss_byte0_clk_src: rcg didn't update its
>>>>>> configuration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or maybe something is missing in the DSI PHY PLL driver?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have the no-zero-freq workaround?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it is necessary also for my variant. I did not include it here, but
>>>> I should mention it in the cover letter.
>>>
>>> Could you please possibly backtrace the corresponding enable() calls?
>>
>>
>> It's the same backtrace I shared some time ago in internal discussions:
>> https://pastebin.com/kxUFgzD9
>> Unless you ask for some other backtrace?
>>
>>> I'd let Stephen and/or Bjorn or Konrad to correct me, but I think that
>>> such requirement should be handled by the framework instead of having
>>> the drivers to manually reparent the clocks.
>>
>> I don't know how exactly you would like to solve it. The clocks can be
>> reparented only after some other device specific enable sequence. It's
>> the third device here, but not reflected in the clocks hierarchy. Maybe
>> it's the result how entire Display device nodes were designed in the
>> first place?
>>
>> Assigned clocks are between DSI PHY and DISP cc, but they are a property
>> of DSI controller. This looks exactly too specific for core to handle
>> and drivers, not framework, should manually reparent such clocks.
>> Otherwise we need
>> "clk_pre_prepare_callback_if_we_are_called_when_phy_is_disabled" sort of
>> callback.
> 
> What kind of PHY programming is required? Is enabling the PLL enough or
> does it need anything else? Are the PLL supplies properly enabled at
> this point?
> 

I don't know exactly and checking is tricky. I tried to use
CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE - with equivalent code, setting proper parents but
without enabling the DSI PHY PLL manually just with
CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE - but then you have multiple:

dsi0_pll_bit_clk: Zero divisor and CLK_DIVIDER_ALLOW_ZERO not set

So how do you supposed to test it? Any assigned-clocks-xxx will be way
too early. Moving code around? Well, if I move preparing the DSI PLL
clocks out of dsi_link_clk_set_rate_6g, then dsi_link_clk_set_rate_6g()
will fail. Always and CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE does not help because of above.

If you have specific code in mind, I can try it, but I don't see easy
methods to see what has to be enabled exactly because of how everything
is entangled together.

Best regards,
Krzysztof