Re: [PATCH] drm: bridge: ldb: add support for using channel 1 only

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/4/23 09:37, Luca Ceresoli wrote:

[...]

@@ -177,28 +183,25 @@ static void fsl_ldb_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
  	clk_prepare_enable(fsl_ldb->clk);
/* Program LDB_CTRL */
-	reg = LDB_CTRL_CH0_ENABLE;
-
-	if (fsl_ldb->lvds_dual_link)
-		reg |= LDB_CTRL_CH1_ENABLE | LDB_CTRL_SPLIT_MODE;
-
-	if (lvds_format_24bpp) {
-		reg |= LDB_CTRL_CH0_DATA_WIDTH;
-		if (fsl_ldb->lvds_dual_link)
-			reg |= LDB_CTRL_CH1_DATA_WIDTH;
-	}
-
-	if (lvds_format_jeida) {
-		reg |= LDB_CTRL_CH0_BIT_MAPPING;
-		if (fsl_ldb->lvds_dual_link)
-			reg |= LDB_CTRL_CH1_BIT_MAPPING;
-	}
-
-	if (mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC) {
-		reg |= LDB_CTRL_DI0_VSYNC_POLARITY;
-		if (fsl_ldb->lvds_dual_link)
-			reg |= LDB_CTRL_DI1_VSYNC_POLARITY;
-	}
+	reg =

Cosmetic nit, do we need the newline here , can't we just move the first '(fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH0_ENABLE : 0) |' on the same line as 'reg =' ? It might need a bit of indent with spaces, but that should be OK.

+		(fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH0_ENABLE : 0) |
+		(fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH1_ENABLE : 0) |
+		(fsl_ldb_is_dual(fsl_ldb) ? LDB_CTRL_SPLIT_MODE : 0);
+
+	if (lvds_format_24bpp)
+		reg |=
+			(fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH0_DATA_WIDTH : 0) |
+			(fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH1_DATA_WIDTH : 0);
+
+	if (lvds_format_jeida)
+		reg |=
+			(fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH0_BIT_MAPPING : 0) |
+			(fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_CH1_BIT_MAPPING : 0);
+
+	if (mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_PVSYNC)
+		reg |=
+			(fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_DI0_VSYNC_POLARITY : 0) |
+			(fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled ? LDB_CTRL_DI1_VSYNC_POLARITY : 0);
regmap_write(fsl_ldb->regmap, fsl_ldb->devdata->ldb_ctrl, reg);

[...]

@@ -311,10 +314,23 @@ static int fsl_ldb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
  	if (IS_ERR(fsl_ldb->regmap))
  		return PTR_ERR(fsl_ldb->regmap);
- /* Locate the panel DT node. */
-	panel_node = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, 0);
-	if (!panel_node)
-		return -ENXIO;
+	/* Locate the remote ports and the panel node */
+	remote1 = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, 0);
+	remote2 = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 2, 0);
+	fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled = (remote1 != NULL);
+	fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled = (remote2 != NULL);
+	panel_node = of_node_get(remote1 ? remote1 : remote2);

You can even do this without the middle 'remote1' I think:

panel_node = of_node_get(remote1 ? : remote2);

+	of_node_put(remote1);
+	of_node_put(remote2);
+
+	if (!fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled && !fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled) {
+		of_node_put(panel_node);
+		return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENXIO, "No panel node found");
+	}
+
+	dev_dbg(dev, "Using %s\n",
+		fsl_ldb_is_dual(fsl_ldb) ? "dual mode" :

I think this is called "dual-link mode" , maybe update the string .

+		fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? "channel 0" : "channel 1");
panel = of_drm_find_panel(panel_node);
  	of_node_put(panel_node);
@@ -325,20 +341,26 @@ static int fsl_ldb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
  	if (IS_ERR(fsl_ldb->panel_bridge))
  		return PTR_ERR(fsl_ldb->panel_bridge);
- /* Determine whether this is dual-link configuration */
-	port1 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(dev->of_node, 1);
-	port2 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(dev->of_node, 2);
-	dual_link = drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order(port1, port2);
-	of_node_put(port1);
-	of_node_put(port2);
- if (dual_link == DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS) {
-		dev_err(dev, "LVDS channel pixel swap not supported.\n");
-		return -EINVAL;
-	}
+	if (fsl_ldb_is_dual(fsl_ldb)) {
+		struct device_node *port1, *port2;
+
+		port1 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(dev->of_node, 1);
+		port2 = of_graph_get_port_by_id(dev->of_node, 2);
+		dual_link = drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order(port1, port2);
+		of_node_put(port1);
+		of_node_put(port2);
- if (dual_link == DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_ODD_EVEN_PIXELS)
-		fsl_ldb->lvds_dual_link = true;
+		if (dual_link < 0)
+			return dev_err_probe(dev, dual_link,
+					     "Error getting dual link configuration");

Does this need a trailing '\n' in the formatting string or not ? I think yes.

The rest looks good, with the few details fixed:

Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux