On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 5:35 PM Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hi Jagan, > > > > On Monday, July 17, 2023 2:44 PM Jagan Teki > <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 11:44 AM Liu Ying <victor.liu@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Freescale i.MX93 SoC embeds a Synopsys Designware MIPI DSI host > > > > controller and a Synopsys Designware MIPI DPHY. Some configurations > > > > and extensions to them are controlled by i.MX93 media blk-ctrl. > > > > > > > > Add a DRM bridge for i.MX93 MIPI DSI by using existing DW MIPI DSI > > > > bridge helpers and implementing i.MX93 MIPI DSI specific extensions. > > > > > > I think the better way would add compatibility to be part of existing > > > dw-mipi-dsi.c with specific driver data. This way it avoids all the > > > platform-related helpers(extensions) and makes the driver generic to > > > all SoCs which use DW DSI IP. It would be a straightforward change as > > > the imx93 drm pipeline already supports bridge topology. > > > > The platform-related stuff is handed over to dw-mipi-dsi.c via struct > > dw_mipi_dsi_plat_data as an argument of dw_mipi_dsi_probe(). It looks > > ok for vendor drivers to call dw_mipi_dsi_probe() to set the platform- > related > > information(rockchip, meson and stm do that), like pdata.phy_ops and > > pdata.host_ops. > > I understand this topology of having soc-platform drivers with > dw-mipi-dsi bridge. What I'm suggesting is to not add a soc-platform > driver for imx93 instead add add support directly on dw-mipi-dsi > bridge. It seems that directly supporting i.MX93 MIPI DSI in dw-mipi-dsi.c is not feasible. The main reason is that struct dw_mipi_dsi_plat_data contains phy_ops and each vendor driver provides very different methods for phy, while... > > > > > dw-mipi-dsi.c is generic w/wo this patch series. > > > > Can you elaborate more about adding compatibility to be part of existing > > dw-mipi-dsi.c with specific driver data? I don't see clear approach to do > > that. > > Please check the above comments, an example of samsung-dsim.c ... it seems that samsung-dsim.c uses struct samsung_dsim_driver_data to differential platform information and it doesn't contain any callback, which means comparing to DW MIPI DSI, Samsung DSIM shows more consistency across vendor SoCs from HW IP/SoC integration PoV. Regards, Liu Ying > > Thanks, > Jagan.
