Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 Mar 2022 13:01:02 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v16 4/8] soc: mediatek: add mtk-mmsys support for mt8195 vdosys0 | From | Matthias Brugger <> |
| |
On 30/03/2022 12:04, Jason-JH Lin wrote: > Hi CK, > > Thanks for the review. > > On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 13:39 +0800, CK Hu wrote: >> Hi, Jason: >> >> On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 13:03 +0800, Jason-JH Lin wrote: >>> Hi CK, >>> >>> Thanks for the reviews. >>> >>> On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 11:28 +0800, jason-jh.lin wrote: >>>> Add mt8195 vdosys0 clock driver name and routing table to >>>> the driver data of mtk-mmsys. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: jason-jh.lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> >>>> Acked-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno < >>>> angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> >>>> --- >>>> Impelmentation patch of vdosys1 can be refered to [1] >>>> >>>> [1] soc: mediatek: add mtk-mmsys support for mt8195 vdosys1 >>>> --- >>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8195-mmsys.h | 130 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c | 11 +++ >>>> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.h | 9 ++ >>>> 3 files changed, 150 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8195-mmsys.h >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8195-mmsys.h >>>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8195-mmsys.h >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..24a3afe23bc8 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8195-mmsys.h >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,130 @@ >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */ >>>> + >>>> +#ifndef __SOC_MEDIATEK_MT8195_MMSYS_H >>>> +#define __SOC_MEDIATEK_MT8195_MMSYS_H >>>> + >>>> +#define MT8195_VDO0_OVL_MOUT_EN >>>> 0xf14 >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL0_TO_DISP_RDMA0 >>>> BIT(0) >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL0_TO_DISP_WDMA0 >>>> BIT(1) >>>> >>>> Useless, so remove. >>>> >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL0_TO_DISP_OVL1 >>>> BIT(2) >>>> Ditto.Useless, so remove. >>>> Regards, >>>> CK >>> >>> Although these definitions are not used, they represent the >>> functionality provided by this register. >>> >>> I think we can show that we have these capabilities by defining >>> them. >>> >>> Can we keep these definitions? >> >> It's better that we know how to use it. Even though the symbol name >> show some information, but I would like to add it to >> mmsys_mt8195_routing_table[]. >> >> Regards, >> CK >> > > OK, I think I just remove the useless define.
Actually I would prefer to add it to the routing table to describe all the capabilities of the HW.
Is there any technical problem with that?
Regards, Matthias
> Thanks. > > Regards, > Jason-JH.Lin >>> >>> Regards, >>> Jason-JH.Lin >>> >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL1_TO_DISP_RDMA1 >>>> BIT(4) >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL1_TO_DISP_WDMA1 >>>> BIT(5) >>>> +#define MT8195_MOUT_DISP_OVL1_TO_DISP_OVL0 >>>> BIT(6) >>> >>> >>> [snip] >>> >> >>
| |