On Friday 15 of November 2013 21:53:16 Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> Hi Sean, Tomasz,
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Sean,
> >
> > On Tuesday 29 of October 2013 12:13:05 Sean Paul wrote:
> >> This patch uses the mode passed into mode_set to configure fimd instead
> >> of directly using the panel from context. This will allow us to move
> >> the exynos_drm_display implementation from fimd into the DP driver
> >> where it belongs.
> >
> > Remember that DP is not the only possible way to connect a display driven
> > by FIMD. You also have the direct (RGB and i80) and DSI interfaces.
> >
> > Also, please see my comments inline.
> >
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Changes in v2: None
> >> Changes in v3: None
> >>
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c | 159 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> >> 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c
> >> index d2b8ccb..f69d6e5 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_fimd.c
> >> @@ -104,6 +104,20 @@ struct fimd_win_data {
> >> bool resume;
> >> };
> >>
> >> +struct fimd_mode_data {
> >> + unsigned vtotal;
> >
> > For consistency with rest of the code, unsigned int would prefered.
> >
> > However, I'm not sure what is this struct for, since it does not store
> > neither raw register values (1 needs to be subtracted from them) nor
> > any values hard to compute at commit time (maybe except clkdiv, but still
> > how often commit would be called?).
> >
> >> + unsigned vdisplay;
> >> + unsigned vsync_len;
> >> + unsigned vbpd;
> >> + unsigned vfpd;
> >> + unsigned htotal;
> >> + unsigned hdisplay;
> >> + unsigned hsync_len;
> >> + unsigned hbpd;
> >> + unsigned hfpd;
> >> + u32 clkdiv;
> >> +};
> >> +
> >> struct fimd_context {
> >> struct device *dev;
> >> struct drm_device *drm_dev;
> >> @@ -112,8 +126,8 @@ struct fimd_context {
> >> struct clk *bus_clk;
> >> struct clk *lcd_clk;
> >> void __iomem *regs;
> >> + struct fimd_mode_data mode;
> >> struct fimd_win_data win_data[WINDOWS_NR];
> >> - unsigned int clkdiv;
> >> unsigned int default_win;
> >> unsigned long irq_flags;
> >> u32 vidcon0;
> >> @@ -560,11 +574,56 @@ static void fimd_dpms(struct exynos_drm_manager *mgr, int mode)
> >> mutex_unlock(&ctx->lock);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static u32 fimd_calc_clkdiv(struct fimd_context *ctx,
> >> + const struct drm_display_mode *mode)
> >> +{
> >> + unsigned long ideal_clk = mode->htotal * mode->vtotal * mode->vrefresh;
> >> + u32 clkdiv;
> >> +
> >> + /* Find the clock divider value that gets us closest to ideal_clk */
> >> + clkdiv = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(clk_get_rate(ctx->lcd_clk), ideal_clk);
> >
> > This is a functional change unrelated to $subject. Before this patch,
> > DIV_ROUND_UP() had been used.
> >
> >> +
> >> + return (clkdiv < 0x100) ? clkdiv : 0xff;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static bool fimd_mode_fixup(struct exynos_drm_manager *mgr,
> >> + const struct drm_display_mode *mode,
> >> + struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode)
> >> +{
> >> + if (adjusted_mode->vrefresh == 0)
> >> + adjusted_mode->vrefresh = FIMD_DEFAULT_FRAMERATE;
>
> The actual pixel clock will be clk_get_rate(ctx->lcd_clk) / clkdiv.
> Should we also be adjusting the "clock" field of adjusted_mode here?
Not sure how the pixel clock in adjusted_mode is used elsewhere, but at
least for the sake of consistency, it might be good idea to adjust it
indeed.
Best regards,
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
