| Message ID | 20220315061031.21642-2-moudy.ho@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add mutex support for MDP | expand |
Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { > const unsigned int *mutex_sof; > const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; > const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; > + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; Can we change this to u64 instead? With that done, Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: >> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through >> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to >> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP >> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. >> >> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", >> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is >> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" >> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. >> >> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> >> --- >> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ >> 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { >> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; >> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; >> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; >> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; > > Can we change this to u64 instead? Linux is still LP64, correct? Rob
Hi Rob, On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote: > On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: > >> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > >> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to > >> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > >> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > >> > >> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > >> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is > >> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > >> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > >> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > >> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > >> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { > >> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; > >> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; > >> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; > >> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; > > > > Can we change this to u64 instead? > > Linux is still LP64, correct? On 64-bit platforms, yes. Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms. But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Il 15/03/22 15:50, Geert Uytterhoeven ha scritto: > Hi Rob, > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote: >> On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >>> Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: >>>> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through >>>> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to >>>> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP >>>> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. >>>> >>>> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", >>>> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is >>>> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" >>>> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > >>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >>>> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { >>>> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; >>>> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; >>>> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; >>>> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; >>> >>> Can we change this to u64 instead? >> >> Linux is still LP64, correct? > > On 64-bit platforms, yes. > > Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms. > But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt > to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values? > Exactly. I wanted this to be a hint of what's happening in the background, without using unions to describe this. Geert, thanks for immediately understanding my intention. Cheers, Angelo > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds
Hi, Moudy: On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 14:10 +0800, Moudy Ho wrote: > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs > to > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", > "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, > which is > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and > "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) > [snip] > > diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > @@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap; > struct device; > struct mtk_mutex; > > +enum mtk_mutex_table_index { > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */ Useless, so remove this. > + > + /* MDP table index */ > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0, > + > + /* DDP table index */ > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1, If this patch would support DDP, add all DDP index. If this patch does not support DDP, remove these. Regards, CK > + > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */ > +}; > + > struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev); > int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 15:58 +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 15/03/22 15:50, Geert Uytterhoeven ha scritto: > > Hi Rob, > > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> > > wrote: > > > On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > > > > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: > > > > > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware > > > > > through > > > > > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" > > > > > needs to > > > > > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP > > > > > and MDP > > > > > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > > > > > > > > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", > > > > > "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > > > > > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been > > > > > added, which is > > > > > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and > > > > > "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > > > > > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > > > > > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > > > > > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { > > > > > const unsigned int *mutex_sof; > > > > > const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; > > > > > const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; > > > > > + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; > > > > > > > > Can we change this to u64 instead? > > > > > > Linux is still LP64, correct? > > > > On 64-bit platforms, yes. > > > > Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux > > platforms. > > But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it > > doesn't hurt > > to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values? > > > > Exactly. I wanted this to be a hint of what's happening in the > background, > without using unions to describe this. > > Geert, thanks for immediately understanding my intention. > > Cheers, > Angelo > > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > > > Geert > > > > -- > > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- > > geert@linux-m68k.org > > > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a > > hacker. But > > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or > > something like that. > > -- Linus Torvalds > > Hi, Thanks for all suggestions, I will adjust this confusing settings, and change to a more efficient space-using way to achieve same purpose. Thanks, Moudy
On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 10:25 +0800, CK Hu wrote: > Hi, Moudy: > > On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 14:10 +0800, Moudy Ho wrote: > > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware > > through > > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs > > to > > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", > > "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, > > which is > > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and > > "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ > > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) > > > > [snip] > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > > b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > > index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > > +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > > @@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap; > > struct device; > > struct mtk_mutex; > > > > +enum mtk_mutex_table_index { > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */ > > Useless, so remove this. > > > + > > + /* MDP table index */ > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0, > > + > > + /* DDP table index */ > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0, > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1, > > If this patch would support DDP, add all DDP index. If this patch > does > not support DDP, remove these. > > Regards, > CK > Hi CK, Thanks for your review. I will remove those redundant settings. Thanks, Moudy > > + > > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */ > > +}; > > + > > struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev); > > int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > > +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > > +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > > void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > > +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > > +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > > void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > >
diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { const unsigned int *mutex_sof; const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; const bool no_clk; }; @@ -445,6 +446,84 @@ void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_add_comp); +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx) +{ + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx, + mutex[mutex->id]); + unsigned int reg; + unsigned int offset; + + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex); + + if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE || + idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX) + return; + + if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) { + offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg, + mutex->id); + reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset); + reg |= mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx]; + writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset); + } else { + offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id); + reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset); + reg |= (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32); + writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset); + } +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_mod); + +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx) +{ + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx, + mutex[mutex->id]); + unsigned int sof_id; + + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex); + + if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE || + idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX) + return; + + switch (idx) { + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI2; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI3; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI0; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI1; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF0; + break; + case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF1; + break; + default: + sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE; + break; + } + + writel_relaxed(mtx->data->mutex_sof[sof_id], + mtx->regs + + DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg, mutex->id)); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_sof); + void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id) { @@ -485,6 +564,49 @@ void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_remove_comp); +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx) +{ + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx, + mutex[mutex->id]); + unsigned int reg; + unsigned int offset; + + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex); + + if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE || + idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX) + return; + + if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) { + offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg, + mutex->id); + reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset); + reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx]); + writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset); + } else { + offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id); + reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset); + reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32); + writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset); + } +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_mod); + +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex) +{ + struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx, + mutex[mutex->id]); + + WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex); + + writel_relaxed(MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE, + mtx->regs + + DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg, + mutex->id)); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_sof); + void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex) { struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx, diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644 --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h @@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap; struct device; struct mtk_mutex; +enum mtk_mutex_table_index { + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */ + + /* MDP table index */ + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0, + + /* DDP table index */ + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0, + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1, + + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */ +}; + struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev); int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> --- drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)