Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v16 3/8] drm/mediatek: Add MT8195 Embedded DisplayPort driver | From | CK Hu <> | Date | Mon, 8 Aug 2022 13:46:39 +0800 |
| |
Hi, Bo-Chen:
On Fri, 2022-08-05 at 18:14 +0800, Bo-Chen Chen wrote: > From: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@baylibre.com> > > This patch adds a embedded displayport driver for the MediaTek mt8195 > SoC. > > It supports the MT8195, the embedded DisplayPort units. It offers > DisplayPort 1.4 with up to 4 lanes. > > The driver creates a child device for the phy. The child device will > never exist without the parent being active. As they are sharing a > register range, the parent passes a regmap pointer to the child so > that > both can work with the same register range. The phy driver sets > device > data that is read by the parent to get the phy device that can be > used > to control the phy properties. > > This driver is based on an initial version by > Jitao shi <jitao.shi@mediatek.com> > > Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@baylibre.com> > Signed-off-by: Guillaume Ranquet <granquet@baylibre.com> > Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> > Tested-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno < > angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> > Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno < > angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> > ---
[snip]
> + > +static irqreturn_t mtk_dp_hpd_event(int hpd, void *dev) > +{ > + struct mtk_dp *mtk_dp = dev; > + struct mtk_dp_train_info *train_info = &mtk_dp->train_info; > + u32 irq_status; > + > + irq_status = mtk_dp_read(mtk_dp, MTK_DP_TOP_IRQ_STATUS); > + > + if (!(irq_status & RGS_IRQ_STATUS_TRANSMITTER)) > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
If one of MTK_DP_HPD_INTERRUPT, MTK_DP_HPD_CONNECT, MTK_DP_HPD_DISCONNECT exist, does it imply RGS_IRQ_STATUS_TRANSMITTER exist? If so, I think this checking is redundant because we could directly check MTK_DP_HPD_INTERRUPT, MTK_DP_HPD_CONNECT, MTK_DP_HPD_DISCONNECT.
> + > + irq_status = mtk_dp_swirq_get_clear(mtk_dp) | > + mtk_dp_hwirq_get_clear(mtk_dp); > + > + if (!irq_status) > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > + > + if (irq_status & MTK_DP_HPD_INTERRUPT) > + train_info->hpd_inerrupt = true;
train_info->hpd_inerrupt is useless, so drop it.
> + > + if (!(irq_status & MTK_DP_HPD_CONNECT || > + irq_status & MTK_DP_HPD_DISCONNECT)) > + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
this could be changed to
if (irq_status == MTK_DP_HPD_INTERRUPT) return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
But I find one problem. If irq_status == MTK_DP_HPD_INTERRUPT | MTK_DP_HPD_CONNECT, the thread would not be waked up. Is this what you want?
Regards, CK
> + > + if (!!(mtk_dp_read(mtk_dp, MTK_DP_TRANS_P0_3414) & > + HPD_DB_DP_TRANS_P0_MASK)) > + train_info->cable_plugged_in = true; > + else > + train_info->cable_plugged_in = false; > + > + mtk_dp_update_bits(mtk_dp, MTK_DP_TOP_PWR_STATE, > + DP_PWR_STATE_BANDGAP_TPLL_LANE, > + DP_PWR_STATE_MASK); > + > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > +} > +
| |