Hi Jason,
On 15/09/2022 03:24, Jason-JH Lin wrote:
Hi Matthias,
Thanks for the reviews.
On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 23:24 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
On 14/09/2022 20:23, 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'm not sure Krzysztof gave his Acked-by tag.
I'll remove this tag.
---
.../devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yaml |
2 ++
1 file changed, 2 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..a53b32c0a608 100644
---
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam
l
+++
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek/mediatek,mmsys.yam
l
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ properties:
- mediatek,mt8186-mmsys
- mediatek,mt8192-mmsys
- mediatek,mt8195-mmsys
+ - mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0
As I said in the last submission, we should make mediatek,mt8195-
mmsys as a
fallback of vdosys0. Actually mediatek,mt8195-mmsys is only used for
the
fallback of vdosys0.
I think adding both vdosys0 and vdosys1 can make the description of
this patch clearer.
It's find to me to only add "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0" in this patch.
So I'll remove the "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1" at the next version.
That's not what I wanted to suggest. Up to now in upstream kernel compatible
mediatek,mt8195-mmsys enables support fro vdosys0. The vdosys1 is not yet
upstream, so no support.
If we change the compatible, we should keep mediatek,mt8195-mmsys as fallback of
"mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0" so that older device tree blobs won't break with a
newer kernel.
For "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1" we do not need a fallback compatible as the code
never reached upstream, so no breakage expected.
Hope I explain myself now.
Regards,
Matthias
Regards,
Jason-JH.Lin
Regards,
Matthias
+ - mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1
- mediatek,mt8365-mmsys
- const: syscon
- items:
