Hi Robin, Thanks for your feedback! On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 06:46:40PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 11/02/2019 15:02, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > Now that we can express our DMA topology, rely on those property instead of > > hardcoding an offset from the dma_addr_t which wasn't really great. > > > > We still need to add some code to deal with the old DT that would lack that > > property, but we move the offset to the DRM device dma_pfn_offset to be > > able to rely on just the dma_addr_t associated to the GEM object. > > > > Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c > > index 9e9255ee59cd..1846a1b30fea 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_backend.c > > @@ -383,13 +383,6 @@ int sun4i_backend_update_layer_buffer(struct sun4i_backend *backend, > > paddr = drm_fb_cma_get_gem_addr(fb, state, 0); > > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Setting buffer address to %pad\n", &paddr); > > - /* > > - * backend DMA accesses DRAM directly, bypassing the system > > - * bus. As such, the address range is different and the buffer > > - * address needs to be corrected. > > - */ > > - paddr -= PHYS_OFFSET; > > - > > if (fb->format->is_yuv) > > return sun4i_backend_update_yuv_buffer(backend, fb, paddr); > > @@ -835,6 +828,27 @@ static int sun4i_backend_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master, > > dev_set_drvdata(dev, backend); > > spin_lock_init(&backend->frontend_lock); > > + if (of_find_property(dev->of_node, "interconnects", NULL)) { > > + /* > > + * This assume we have the same DMA constraints for all our the > > + * devices in our pipeline (all the backends, but also the > > + * frontends). This sounds bad, but it has always been the case > > + * for us, and DRM doesn't do per-device allocation either, so > > + * we would need to fix DRM first... > > + */ > > + ret = of_dma_configure(drm->dev, dev->of_node, true); > > It would be even nicer if we could ensure that drm->dev originates from a DT > node which has the appropriate interconnects property itself, such that we > can assume it's already configured correctly. The thing is drm->dev comes from a node in the DT that is a virtual node, and therefore doesn't have any resources attached, so I'm not sure we have any other way, unfortunately. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature