lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v12 09/11] media: staging: dt-bindings: add Rockchip MIPI RX D-PHY yaml bindings
    Date
    Am Dienstag, 7. Januar 2020, 03:37:21 CET schrieb Laurent Pinchart:
    > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 11:06:12PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
    > > On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 02:10 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
    > > > Hi Helen,
    > > >
    > > > Thank you for the patch.
    > > >
    > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 05:01:14PM -0300, Helen Koike wrote:
    > > > > Add yaml DT bindings for Rockchip MIPI D-PHY RX
    > > > >
    > > > > This was tested and verified with:
    > > > > mv drivers/staging/media/phy-rockchip-dphy/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/
    > > > > make dt_binding_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml
    > > > > make dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml
    > > > >
    > > > > Signed-off-by: Helen Koike <helen.koike@collabora.com>
    > > > >
    > > > > ---
    > > > >
    > > > > Changes in v12:
    > > > > - The commit replaces the following commit in previous series named
    > > > > media: staging: dt-bindings: Document the Rockchip MIPI RX D-PHY bindings
    > > > > This new patch adds yaml binding and was verified with
    > > > > make dtbs_check and make dt_binding_check
    > > > >
    > > > > Changes in v11: None
    > > > > Changes in v10:
    > > > > - unsquash
    > > > >
    > > > > Changes in v9:
    > > > > - fix title division style
    > > > > - squash
    > > > > - move to staging
    > > > >
    > > > > Changes in v8: None
    > > > > Changes in v7:
    > > > > - updated doc with new design and tested example
    > > > >
    > > > > .../bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml | 75 +++++++++++++++++++
    > > > > 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+)
    > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/staging/media/phy-rockchip-dphy/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml
    > > > >
    > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/phy-rockchip-dphy/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml b/drivers/staging/media/phy-
    > > > > rockchip-dphy/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml
    > > > > new file mode 100644
    > > > > index 000000000000..af97f1b3e005
    > > > > --- /dev/null
    > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/phy-rockchip-dphy/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml
    > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
    > > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
    > > > > +%YAML 1.2
    > > > > +---
    > > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/phy/rockchip-mipi-dphy.yaml#
    > > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
    > > > > +
    > > > > +title: Rockchip SoC MIPI RX0 D-PHY Device Tree Bindings
    > > >
    > > > Should this be s/RX0/RX/ ? Or do you expect different bindings for RX1 ?
    > >
    > > The driver currently only supports RX0, but I think you are right,
    > > it should say RX here. This binding could be extended for RX1.
    > >
    > > > Looking at the PHY driver, it seems to handle all PHYs with a single
    > > > struct device. Should we thus use #phy-cells = <1> to select the PHY ?
    > >
    > > I am not following this. The driver handles just one PHY. Each PHY
    > > should have its own node.
    >
    > Looking at the registers, it seems that the different PHYs are
    > intertwined and we would could have trouble handling the different PHYs
    > with different DT nodes and thus struct device instances.

    I have to confess to not following _ALL_ of the threads, so may say
    something stupid, but I don't think the PHYs are intertwined so much.

    Where RX0 is controlled from the "General Register Files" alone
    [register dumping ground for soc designers], the TX1RX1-phy
    actually gets controlled from inside the dsi1 register area it seems.

    So in my previous (still unsucessful) tests, I was rolling with something like
    https://github.com/mmind/linux-rockchip/commit/e0d4b03976d2aab85a8c1630be937ea003b5df88

    With the actual "logic" picked from the vendor kernel, that just double-
    maps the dsi1-registers in both dsi and dphy driver, which was strange.


    Heiko


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-01-07 10:29    [W:2.813 / U:0.040 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site