Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 May 2024 14:57:03 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/rockchip: vop2: configure layers for vp3 on rk3588 | From | Quentin Schulz <> |
| |
Hi Heiko,
On 4/25/24 9:55 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > From: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@cherry.de> > > The rk3588 VOP2 has 4 video-ports, yet the driver currently only > configures the first 3, as used on the rk3568. >
I'm wondering whether we should update the drawing at the top of the driver then?
> Add another block to configure the vp3 as well, if applicable. > > Fixes: 5a028e8f062f ("drm/rockchip: vop2: Add support for rk3588") > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@cherry.de> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.c > index 523880a4e8e74..1a327a9ed7ee4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop2.c > @@ -2303,6 +2303,7 @@ static void vop2_setup_alpha(struct vop2_video_port *vp) > static void vop2_setup_layer_mixer(struct vop2_video_port *vp) > { > struct vop2 *vop2 = vp->vop2; > + const struct vop2_data *vop2_data = vop2->data; > struct drm_plane *plane; > u32 layer_sel = 0; > u32 port_sel; > @@ -2344,6 +2345,17 @@ static void vop2_setup_layer_mixer(struct vop2_video_port *vp) > else > port_sel |= FIELD_PREP(RK3568_OVL_PORT_SET__PORT2_MUX, 8); > > + /* configure vp3 */ > + if (vop2_data->soc_id == 3588) {
I think it'd be smarter to check against vop2->data->nr_vps >= 4; so that we don't need to maintain a list of SoCs that support a specific number of video ports.
> + struct vop2_video_port *vp3 = &vop2->vps[3];
This is always possible because vps is statically allocated for 4 items, c.f. struct vop2_video_port vps[ROCKCHIP_MAX_CRTC]; so we don't necessarily need it in this specific location and can group it with the others. Cosmetic suggestion though.
Otherwise, the change itself makes sense to me, so:
Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
Thanks! Quentin
| |