On Fri, 06 Jan 2023 14:30:52 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 02:47:27PM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the PXP_HW_VERSION register reports the PXP on the i.MX7D
> > and on the i.MX6ULL as version 3.0, although the PXP versions on these
> > SoCs have significant differences.
> >
> > Use the compatible to configure the ctrl0 register as required dependent
> > on the platform.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/platform/nxp/imx-pxp.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/nxp/imx-pxp.c b/drivers/media/platform/nxp/imx-pxp.c
> > index 1d649b9cadad..4e182f80a36b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/platform/nxp/imx-pxp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/nxp/imx-pxp.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> > #include <linux/sched.h>
> > #include <linux/slab.h>
> >
> > @@ -191,6 +192,11 @@ static struct pxp_fmt *find_format(struct v4l2_format *f)
> > return &formats[k];
> > }
> >
> > +struct pxp_ctx;
>
> Please add a blank line here.
>
> > +struct pxp_pdata {
> > + u32 (*data_path_ctrl0)(struct pxp_ctx *ctx);
> > +};
> > +
> > struct pxp_dev {
> > struct v4l2_device v4l2_dev;
> > struct video_device vfd;
> > @@ -199,6 +205,7 @@ struct pxp_dev {
> > void __iomem *mmio;
> >
> > u32 hw_version;
> > + const struct pxp_pdata *pdata;
> >
> > atomic_t num_inst;
> > struct mutex dev_mutex;
> > @@ -726,7 +733,7 @@ static void pxp_setup_csc(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -static u32 pxp_data_path_ctrl0(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > +static u32 pxp_imx6ull_data_path_ctrl0(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > {
> > u32 ctrl0;
> >
> > @@ -756,6 +763,16 @@ static u32 pxp_data_path_ctrl0(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > return ctrl0;
> > }
> >
> > +static u32 pxp_data_path_ctrl0(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > +{
> > + struct pxp_dev *dev = ctx->dev;
> > +
> > + if (dev->pdata && dev->pdata->data_path_ctrl0)
> > + return dev->pdata->data_path_ctrl0(ctx);
> > +
> > + return pxp_imx6ull_data_path_ctrl0(ctx);
>
> Do you need this fallback, given that all compatible strings give you
> valid pdata ? I'd rather be explicit.
>
> This function then becomes so small that I would inline it in the
> caller.
I was a bit paranoid that there may be cases in which pdata is not set. I will
change this to assume that pdata is always valid and just be explicit.
Michael
>
> > +}
> > +
> > static void pxp_set_data_path(struct pxp_ctx *ctx)
> > {
> > struct pxp_dev *dev = ctx->dev;
> > @@ -1711,6 +1728,8 @@ static int pxp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (!dev)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > + dev->pdata = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> > +
> > dev->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "axi");
> > if (IS_ERR(dev->clk)) {
> > ret = PTR_ERR(dev->clk);
> > @@ -1811,8 +1830,12 @@ static int pxp_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static const struct pxp_pdata pxp_imx6ull_pdata = {
> > + .data_path_ctrl0 = pxp_imx6ull_data_path_ctrl0,
> > +};
> > +
> > static const struct of_device_id pxp_dt_ids[] = {
> > - { .compatible = "fsl,imx6ull-pxp", .data = NULL },
> > + { .compatible = "fsl,imx6ull-pxp", .data = &pxp_imx6ull_pdata },
> > { },
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, pxp_dt_ids);
