Hi Chanho,
On Friday 09 of August 2013 16:40:49 Chanho Park wrote:
> The exynos4 platform is only dt-based since 3.10, we should convert
> driver data and ids to dt-based parsing methods. The rotator driver has
> a limit table to get size limit of input picture. Each SoCs has slightly
> different limit value compared with any others.
> For example, exynos4210's max_size of RGB888 is 16k x 16k. But, others
> have 8k x 8k. Another example the exynos5250 should have multiple of 2
> pixel size for its X/Y axis. Thus, we should keep different tables for
> each of them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chanho Park <chanho61.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c | 109
> ++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 28
> deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c index 427640a..39b09e0
> 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_rotator.c
> @@ -632,6 +632,73 @@ static int rotator_ippdrv_start(struct device *dev,
> enum drm_exynos_ipp_cmd cmd) return 0;
> }
>
> +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_4210 = {
> + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> + .min_w = 32,
> + .min_h = 32,
> + .max_w = SZ_64K,
> + .max_h = SZ_64K,
> + .align = 3,
> + },
> + .rgb888 = {
> + .min_w = 8,
> + .min_h = 8,
> + .max_w = SZ_16K,
> + .max_h = SZ_16K,
> + .align = 2,
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_4x12 = {
> + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> + .min_w = 32,
> + .min_h = 32,
> + .max_w = SZ_32K,
> + .max_h = SZ_32K,
> + .align = 3,
> + },
> + .rgb888 = {
> + .min_w = 8,
> + .min_h = 8,
> + .max_w = SZ_8K,
> + .max_h = SZ_8K,
> + .align = 2,
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl_5250 = {
> + .ycbcr420_2p = {
> + .min_w = 32,
> + .min_h = 32,
> + .max_w = SZ_32K,
> + .max_h = SZ_32K,
> + .align = 3,
> + },
> + .rgb888 = {
> + .min_w = 8,
> + .min_h = 8,
> + .max_w = SZ_8K,
> + .max_h = SZ_8K,
> + .align = 1,
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_rotator_match[] = {
> + {
> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-rotator",
> + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_4210,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-rotator",
> + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_4x12,
> + },
> + {
> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-rotator",
> + .data = &rot_limit_tbl_5250,
> + },
> + {},
> +};
> +
> static int rotator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> @@ -645,8 +712,19 @@ static int rotator_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev) return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> - rot->limit_tbl = (struct rot_limit_table *)
> - platform_get_device_id(pdev)->driver_data;
> + if (dev->of_node) {
> + const struct of_device_id *match;
> + match = of_match_node(of_match_ptr(exynos_rotator_match),
> + dev->of_node);
> + if (match == NULL) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to match node\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + rot->limit_tbl = (struct rot_limit_table *)match->data;
> + } else {
> + dev_err(dev, "cannot find binding\n");
What about having a check for !dev->of_node at the beginning of probe, to
not complicate further code?
Also the error message is confusing. It should be something closer to
"device does not have of_node".
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> rot->regs_res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> rot->regs = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, rot->regs_res);
> @@ -718,31 +796,6 @@ static int rotator_remove(struct platform_device
> *pdev) return 0;
> }
>
> -static struct rot_limit_table rot_limit_tbl = {
> - .ycbcr420_2p = {
> - .min_w = 32,
> - .min_h = 32,
> - .max_w = SZ_32K,
> - .max_h = SZ_32K,
> - .align = 3,
> - },
> - .rgb888 = {
> - .min_w = 8,
> - .min_h = 8,
> - .max_w = SZ_8K,
> - .max_h = SZ_8K,
> - .align = 2,
> - },
> -};
> -
> -static struct platform_device_id rotator_driver_ids[] = {
> - {
> - .name = "exynos-rot",
> - .driver_data = (unsigned long)&rot_limit_tbl,
> - },
> - {},
> -};
> -
> static int rotator_clk_crtl(struct rot_context *rot, bool enable)
> {
> if (enable) {
> @@ -804,10 +857,10 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops rotator_pm_ops = {
> struct platform_driver rotator_driver = {
> .probe = rotator_probe,
> .remove = rotator_remove,
> - .id_table = rotator_driver_ids,
> .driver = {
> .name = "exynos-rot",
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> .pm = &rotator_pm_ops,
> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_rotator_match),
> },
> };
Otherwise looks fine.
One more thing is that IMHO patch 5/5 could be squashed with this one, so
documentation for the binding would be available at the same it is
introduced.
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
