| Message ID | 20220920140145.19973-2-jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Change mmsys compatible for mt8195 mediatek-drm | expand |
On 20/09/2022 16:01, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display HW > pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the same > clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. > > For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines binding to > 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and different > mediatek-drm drivers. > > Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: COLOR, > CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture Quality) > and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not > including in VDOSYS1. > > Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR related > component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while it's not > including in VDOSYS0. > > To summarize0: > Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. > Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. > > Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys hardwares to > 2 different compatibles for MT8195. > > Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add mt8195 SoC binding") > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml > index 6ad023eec193..df9184b6772c 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml > @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ properties: > - const: mediatek,mt7623-mmsys > - const: mediatek,mt2701-mmsys > - const: syscon > + - items: > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys > + - const: syscon and why mediatek,mt8195-mmsys is kept as non-deprecated? Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, Thanks for the reviews. On Tue, 2022-09-20 at 17:25 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 20/09/2022 16:01, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > > For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display HW > > pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the same > > clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. > > > > For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines binding > > to > > 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and different > > mediatek-drm drivers. > > > > Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: COLOR, > > CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture > > Quality) > > and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not > > including in VDOSYS1. > > > > Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR related > > component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while it's > > not > > including in VDOSYS0. > > > > To summarize0: > > Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. > > Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. > > > > Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys hardwares > > to > > 2 different compatibles for MT8195. > > > > Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add mt8195 > > SoC binding") > > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > > Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml | 4 > > ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam > > l > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam > > l > > index 6ad023eec193..df9184b6772c 100644 > > --- > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam > > l > > +++ > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam > > l > > @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ properties: > > - const: mediatek,mt7623-mmsys > > - const: mediatek,mt2701-mmsys > > - const: syscon > > + - items: > > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 > > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys > > + - const: syscon > > and why mediatek,mt8195-mmsys is kept as non-deprecated? Shouldn't we keep this for fallback compatible? I think this items could support the device node like: foo { compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0", "mediatek,mt8195-mmsys", "syscon"; } Or should I change the items like this? - items: - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 - enum: - mediatek,mt8195-mmsys - const: syscon Regards, Jason-JH.Lin > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On 21/09/2022 06:16, Jason-JH Lin wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > Thanks for the reviews. > > On Tue, 2022-09-20 at 17:25 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 20/09/2022 16:01, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: >>> For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display HW >>> pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the same >>> clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. >>> >>> For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines binding >>> to >>> 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and different >>> mediatek-drm drivers. >>> >>> Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: COLOR, >>> CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture >>> Quality) >>> and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not >>> including in VDOSYS1. >>> >>> Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR related >>> component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while it's >>> not >>> including in VDOSYS0. >>> >>> To summarize0: >>> Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. >>> Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. >>> >>> Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys hardwares >>> to >>> 2 different compatibles for MT8195. >>> >>> Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add mt8195 >>> SoC binding") >>> Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml | 4 >>> ++++ >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git >>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam >>> l >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam >>> l >>> index 6ad023eec193..df9184b6772c 100644 >>> --- >>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam >>> l >>> +++ >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam >>> l >>> @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ properties: >>> - const: mediatek,mt7623-mmsys >>> - const: mediatek,mt2701-mmsys >>> - const: syscon >>> + - items: >>> + - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 >>> + - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys >>> + - const: syscon >> >> and why mediatek,mt8195-mmsys is kept as non-deprecated? > > Shouldn't we keep this for fallback compatible? I am not talking about it. > > I think this items could support the device node like: > foo { > compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0", "mediatek,mt8195-mmsys", > "syscon"; > } > Yes, this one ok. > > Or should I change the items like this? > - items: > - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 > - enum: > - mediatek,mt8195-mmsys > - const: syscon > No, this does not look correct. I asked why do you keep old mediatek,mt8195-mmsys compatible in the same place (the alone one), without making it deprecated? Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, 2022-09-21 at 08:28 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 21/09/2022 06:16, Jason-JH Lin wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > Thanks for the reviews. > > > > On Tue, 2022-09-20 at 17:25 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 20/09/2022 16:01, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > > > > For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display > > > > HW > > > > pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the > > > > same > > > > clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. > > > > > > > > For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines > > > > binding > > > > to > > > > 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and > > > > different > > > > mediatek-drm drivers. > > > > > > > > Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: > > > > COLOR, > > > > CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture > > > > Quality) > > > > and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not > > > > including in VDOSYS1. > > > > > > > > Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR > > > > related > > > > component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while > > > > it's > > > > not > > > > including in VDOSYS0. > > > > > > > > To summarize0: > > > > Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. > > > > Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. > > > > > > > > Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys > > > > hardwares > > > > to > > > > 2 different compatibles for MT8195. > > > > > > > > Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add > > > > mt8195 > > > > SoC binding") > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> > > > > --- > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml > > > > | 4 > > > > ++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys > > > > .yam > > > > l > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys > > > > .yam > > > > l > > > > index 6ad023eec193..df9184b6772c 100644 > > > > --- > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys > > > > .yam > > > > l > > > > +++ > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys > > > > .yam > > > > l > > > > @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ properties: > > > > - const: mediatek,mt7623-mmsys > > > > - const: mediatek,mt2701-mmsys > > > > - const: syscon > > > > + - items: > > > > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 > > > > + - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys > > > > + - const: syscon > > > > > > and why mediatek,mt8195-mmsys is kept as non-deprecated? > > > > Shouldn't we keep this for fallback compatible? > > I am not talking about it. > > > > > I think this items could support the device node like: > > foo { > > compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0", "mediatek,mt8195-mmsys", > > "syscon"; > > } > > > > Yes, this one ok. > > > > > Or should I change the items like this? > > - items: > > - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 > > - enum: > > - mediatek,mt8195-mmsys > > - const: syscon > > > > No, this does not look correct. OK, I'll keep this one: - items: - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys - const: syscon Thanks for the reviews. > > I asked why do you keep old mediatek,mt8195-mmsys compatible in the > same > place (the alone one), without making it deprecated? - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt2701-mmsys - mediatek,mt2712-mmsys - mediatek,mt6765-mmsys - mediatek,mt6779-mmsys - mediatek,mt6797-mmsys - mediatek,mt8167-mmsys - mediatek,mt8173-mmsys - mediatek,mt8183-mmsys - mediatek,mt8186-mmsys - mediatek,mt8192-mmsys - mediatek,mt8195-mmsys Do you mean this one can be deprecated? I'm not sure if I should keep this after adding the new item. If so, I can remove this at the next version. - mediatek,mt8365-mmsys - const: syscon Regards, Jason-JH.Lin > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml index 6ad023eec193..df9184b6772c 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ properties: - const: mediatek,mt7623-mmsys - const: mediatek,mt2701-mmsys - const: syscon + - items: + - const: mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0 + - const: mediatek,mt8195-mmsys + - const: syscon reg: maxItems: 1
For previous MediaTek SoCs, such as MT8173, there are 2 display HW pipelines binding to 1 mmsys with the same power domain, the same clock driver and the same mediatek-drm driver. For MT8195, VDOSYS0 and VDOSYS1 are 2 display HW pipelines binding to 2 different power domains, different clock drivers and different mediatek-drm drivers. Moreover, Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS0 has these components: COLOR, CCORR, AAL, GAMMA, DITHER. They are related to the PQ (Picture Quality) and they makes VDOSYS0 supports PQ function while they are not including in VDOSYS1. Hardware pipeline of VDOSYS1 has the component ETHDR (HDR related component). It makes VDOSYS1 supports the HDR function while it's not including in VDOSYS0. To summarize0: Only VDOSYS0 can support PQ adjustment. Only VDOSYS1 can support HDR adjustment. Therefore, we need to separate these two different mmsys hardwares to 2 different compatibles for MT8195. Fixes: 81c5a41d10b9 ("dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: mmsys: add mt8195 SoC binding") Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@mediatek.com> --- .../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)