On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 at 01:17, Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 4:33 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 at 23:40, Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > According to i.MX8MP RM and HDMI ADD, the fdcc clock is part of > > > hdmi rx verification IP that should not enable for HDMI TX. > > > But actually if the clock is disabled before HDMI/LCDIF probe, > > > LCDIF will not get pixel clock from HDMI PHY and print the error > > > logs: > > > > > > [CRTC:39:crtc-2] vblank wait timed out > > > WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 9 at drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c:1634 drm_atomic_helper_wait_for_vblanks.part.0+0x23c/0x260 > > > > > > Add fdcc clock to LCDIF and HDMI TX power domains to fix the issue. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sandor Yu <Sandor.yu@xxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@xxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Just to let you know, this looks good to me and it seems like the NXP > > people like this too. What I am waiting for is an ack on the DT patch, > > then I am ready to queue this up. > > What about the bindings? I'm assuming that Shawn would take the DT > through his IMX tree, but I am not sure if I need to resubmit the > bindings with a different commit message. I am usually trying to help with patch1 and patch2 for pmdomain related changes - and I am sharing new/updated DT bindings on an immutable "dt" branch. Then Shawn can pull in that branch and apply patch3 to his tree. So, I need an ack on patch1 from some of the DT maintainers to go ahead. Unless you want to manage this entirely through Shawn's tree, that works too. Just let me know. [...] Kind regards Uffe
