On 19/10/2022 12:13, Marijn Suijten wrote:
On 2022-08-26 12:16:40, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On 05/08/2022 15:24, Marijn Suijten wrote:
On 2022-08-05 14:56:30, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
The commit 6874f48bb8b0 ("drm/msm: make mdp5/dpu devices master
components") changed the MDP5 driver to look for the interconnect paths
in the MDSS device rather than in the MDP5 device itself. This was left
unnoticed since on my testing devices the interconnects probably didn't
reach the sync state.
Rather than just using the MDP5 device for ICC path lookups for the MDP5
devices, introduce an additional helper to check both MDP5/DPU and MDSS
nodes. This will be helpful for the MDP5->DPU conversion, since the
driver will have to check both nodes.
Fixes: 6874f48bb8b0 ("drm/msm: make mdp5/dpu devices master components")
Reported-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # On sdm630
But I'm not sure about giving my Reviewed-by to this, as I'd rather
*correct* the DT bindings for sdm630 and msm8996 to provide
interconnects in the MDSS node unless there are strong reasons not to
(and I don't consider "backwards compatibility" to be one, this binding
"never even existed" if mdp5.txt is to be believed).
As a kind of a joke, I'd prefer to have interconnects in the mdp/dpu
device node. In the end, the interconnects describe the path between the
display controller and the DDR, not the path between the whole MDSS and DDR.
So, for next chipsets I'd vote to move icc to dpu/mdp node (and maybe
even move existing inerconnects to the dpu node).
Sure. In that case, do you want to rework this patch / code again to
only look in the DPU/MDP, and not at MDSS at all? (Or is that another
DT API break we'd rather not make?)
I'd rather not make this break. Let's keep backwards compatibility at
least for now.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
