> -----Original Message----- > From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 7:20 PM > To: Deepak, M <m.deepak@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mohan Marimuthu, Yogesh > <yogesh.mohan.marimuthu@xxxxxxxxx>; Nikula, Jani > <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: GPIO for CHT generic MIPI > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:00:34AM +0000, Deepak, M wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 9:07 PM > > > To: Deepak, M <m.deepak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mohan Marimuthu, Yogesh > > > <yogesh.mohan.marimuthu@xxxxxxxxx>; Nikula, Jani > > > <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: GPIO for CHT generic MIPI > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 07:13:46PM +0530, Deepak M wrote: > > > > From: Yogesh Mohan Marimuthu > <yogesh.mohan.marimuthu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The GPIO configuration and register offsets are different from > > > > baytrail for cherrytrail. Port the gpio programming accordingly > > > > for cherrytrail in this patch. > > > > > > > > v2: Removing the duplication of parsing > > > > > > > > v3: Moved the macro def to panel_vbt.c file > > > > > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Yogesh Mohan Marimuthu > > > > <yogesh.mohan.marimuthu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Deepak M <m.deepak@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c | 123 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > > > 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c > > > > index 794bd1f..6b9a1f7 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c > > > > @@ -58,6 +58,28 @@ static inline struct vbt_panel > > > > *to_vbt_panel(struct drm_panel *panel) > > > > > > > > #define NS_KHZ_RATIO 1000000 > > > > > > > > +#define CHV_IOSF_PORT_GPIO_N 0x13 > > > > +#define CHV_IOSF_PORT_GPIO_SE 0x48 > > > > +#define CHV_IOSF_PORT_GPIO_SW 0xB2 > > > > +#define CHV_IOSF_PORT_GPIO_E 0xA8 > > > > > > These should have remained where the other ports were defined. > > > > > > > +#define CHV_MAX_GPIO_NUM_N 72 > > > > +#define CHV_MAX_GPIO_NUM_SE 99 > > > > +#define CHV_MAX_GPIO_NUM_SW 197 > > > > +#define CHV_MIN_GPIO_NUM_SE 73 > > > > +#define CHV_MIN_GPIO_NUM_SW 100 > > > > +#define CHV_MIN_GPIO_NUM_E 198 > > > > > > I never got any explanation where the block sizes came from on VLV. > > > IIRC when I checked them against configdb they didn't match the > > > actual number of pins in the hardware block. And the same story > continues here. > > > Eg. if I check configfb the number of pins in each block is: > > > N 59, SE 55, SW 56, E 24. > > > > > > So I can't review this until someone explains where this stuff comes from. > > > And there should probably be a comment next to the defines to remind > > > the next guy who gets totally confused by this. > > > > > > Also I don't like the fact that VLV and CHV are now implemented in > > > two totally different ways. Can you eliminate the massive gpio table > > > from the VLV code to make it more similar to this? > > > > > [Deepak, M] In CHV the GPIO numberings are sequential but in VLV that > > is not the case, hence the complete table is copied here. I have > > attached the VLV GPIO mapping table which can clear your doubts. Pfa, > > Any chance someone could try to get this table included in the spec, or at > least have a link to it? Having the information spread around this way is not > productive. [Deepak, M] Sure, will try to put this doc in sharepoint. > > -- > Ville Syrjälä > Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
