[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DA5ZNDCHXC6M.1CDYDG6KKMAP0@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 11:35:04 +0200
From: "Michael Walle" <mwalle@...nel.org>
To: "Aradhya Bhatia" <aradhya.bhatia@...ux.dev>, "Rob Herring"
<robh@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, "Conor
Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>, "Tomi Valkeinen"
<tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>, "Jyri Sarha" <jyri.sarha@....fi>
Cc: "Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, "Thomas
Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@...e.de>, "Maxime Ripard" <mripard@...nel.org>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>, "Laurent Pinchart"
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, "Simona Vetter" <simona@...ll.ch>,
"Nishanth Menon" <nm@...com>, "Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@...com>,
"Devarsh Thakkar" <devarsht@...com>, "Praneeth Bajjuri" <praneeth@...com>,
"Udit Kumar" <u-kumar1@...com>, "Jayesh Choudhary" <j-choudhary@...com>,
"Francesco Dolcini" <francesco@...cini.it>, "Alexander Sverdlin"
<alexander.sverdlin@...mens.com>, "DRI Development List"
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "Devicetree List"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "Linux Kernel List"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/4] drm/tidss: Add OLDI bridge support
Hi Aradhya,
> +static int get_oldi_mode(struct device_node *oldi_tx, int *companion_instance)
> +{
> + struct device_node *companion;
> + struct device_node *port0, *port1;
> + u32 companion_reg;
> + bool secondary_oldi = false;
> + int pixel_order;
> +
> + /*
> + * Find if the OLDI is paired with another OLDI for combined OLDI
> + * operation (dual-link or clone).
> + */
> + companion = of_parse_phandle(oldi_tx, "ti,companion-oldi", 0);
> + if (!companion)
> + /*
> + * The OLDI TX does not have a companion, nor is it a
> + * secondary OLDI. It will operate independently.
> + */
> + return OLDI_MODE_SINGLE_LINK;
How is this supposed to work? If I read this code correctly, the
second (companion) port is always reported as SINGLE_LINK if its
device tree node doesn't have a ti,companion-oldi property. But
reading the device tree binding, the companion-old property is only
for the first OLDI port.
FWIW, I've tested this series and I get twice the clock rate as
expected and the second link is reported as "OLDI_MODE_SINGLE_LINK".
I'll dig deeper into this tomorrow.
-michael
> +
> + if (of_property_read_u32(companion, "reg", &companion_reg))
> + return OLDI_MODE_UNSUPPORTED;
> +
> + if (companion_reg > (TIDSS_MAX_OLDI_TXES - 1))
> + /* Invalid companion OLDI reg value. */
> + return OLDI_MODE_UNSUPPORTED;
> +
> + *companion_instance = (int)companion_reg;
> +
> + if (of_property_read_bool(oldi_tx, "ti,secondary-oldi"))
> + secondary_oldi = true;
> +
> + /*
> + * We need to work out if the sink is expecting us to function in
> + * dual-link mode. We do this by looking at the DT port nodes, the
> + * OLDI TX ports are connected to. If they are marked as expecting
> + * even pixels and odd pixels, then we need to enable dual-link.
> + */
> + port0 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(oldi_tx, 1);
> + port1 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(companion, 1);
> + pixel_order = drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order(port0, port1);
> + of_node_put(port0);
> + of_node_put(port1);
> + of_node_put(companion);
> +
> + switch (pixel_order) {
> + case -EINVAL:
> + /*
> + * The dual-link properties were not found in at least
> + * one of the sink nodes. Since 2 OLDI ports are present
> + * in the DT, it can be safely assumed that the required
> + * configuration is Clone Mode.
> + */
> + return (secondary_oldi ? OLDI_MODE_CLONE_SECONDARY_SINGLE_LINK :
> + OLDI_MODE_CLONE_SINGLE_LINK);
> +
> + case DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_ODD_EVEN_PIXELS:
> + return (secondary_oldi ? OLDI_MODE_SECONDARY_DUAL_LINK :
> + OLDI_MODE_DUAL_LINK);
> +
> + /* Unsupported OLDI Modes */
> + case DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS:
> + default:
> + return OLDI_MODE_UNSUPPORTED;
> + }
> +}
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (298 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists