Kukjin Kim ì ê:
InKi Dae wrote:
Signed-off-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig | 6 +++
arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Makefile | 1 +
arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/setup-mipi.c | 76
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/setup-mipi.c
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig
index 862f239..76da541 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Kconfig
@@ -53,6 +53,11 @@ config S5PV210_SETUP_SDHCI_GPIO
help
Common setup code for SDHCI gpio.
+config S5P_SETUP_MIPI_DSI
If this is for S5PV210, please use S5PV210_xxx as prefix. Or this is for S5P
SoCS, move into plat-s5p.
And as I know, this is _not_ only for MIPI DSI master...so need to re-name.
Ok, moved to plat-s5p.
+ bool
+ help
+ Common setup code for MIPI-DSI
+
menu "S5PC110 Machines"
config MACH_AQUILA
@@ -92,6 +97,7 @@ config MACH_GONI
select S5PV210_SETUP_I2C2
select S5PV210_SETUP_KEYPAD
select S5PV210_SETUP_SDHCI
+ select S5P_SETUP_MIPI_DSI
Is this really only for machine?
help
Machine support for Samsung GONI board
S5PC110(MCP) is one of package option of S5PV210
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Makefile
b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Makefile
index ff1a0db..638747c 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/Makefile
@@ -37,3 +37,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_S5PV210_SETUP_IDE) +=
setup-ide.o
obj-$(CONFIG_S5PV210_SETUP_KEYPAD) += setup-keypad.o
obj-$(CONFIG_S5PV210_SETUP_SDHCI) += setup-sdhci.o
obj-$(CONFIG_S5PV210_SETUP_SDHCI_GPIO) += setup-sdhci-gpio.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_S5P_SETUP_MIPI_DSI) += setup-mipi.o
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/setup-mipi.c b/arch/arm/mach-
s5pv210/setup-mipi.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2cc8cd1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/setup-mipi.c
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+/* linux/arch/arm/plat-s5p/setup-mipi.c
+ *
+ * Samsung MIPI-DSI DPHY driver.
+ *
+ * Author: InKi Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
+ * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of
+ * the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ *
+ * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+ * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
+ * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston,
+ * MA 02111-1307 USA
+ */
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
+#include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/err.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/clk.h>
+
+#include <mach/map.h>
+#include <mach/regs-clock.h>
+
+#include <plat/mipi-dsi.h>
Hmm...I didn't find this header in your previous patch.
previous patch??
+#include <plat/regs-dsim.h>
Same.
+
+static int s5p_mipi_enable_d_phy(struct dsim_device *dsim, unsigned int
enable)
Why need struct dsim_device in argument?
As I said, this is for MIPI DSI and MIPI CSI...right?
+{
+ unsigned int reg;
+
+ reg = readl(S5P_MIPI_CONTROL) & ~(1 << 0);
Please use __raw_readl here, because no need memory barrier between
operations.
+ reg |= (enable << 0);
+ writel(reg, S5P_MIPI_CONTROL);
Same.
+
+ return 0;
Always, return 0?
If enabled by MIPI DSI and MIPI CSI, how each IP can know other IP's MIPI
enalbling?
ok, naming issue sould be considered more.
hm, how about using "DSIM"? I think S5P_MIPI_DSI or MIPI_DSI is too long.
+}
+
+static int s5p_mipi_enable_dsi_master(struct dsim_device *dsim,
Same.
+ unsigned int enable)
+{
+ unsigned int reg;
+
+ reg = readl(S5P_MIPI_CONTROL) & ~(1 << 2);
Same.
+ reg |= (enable << 2);
+ writel(reg, S5P_MIPI_CONTROL);
Same.
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+int s5p_mipi_part_reset(struct dsim_device *dsim)
Do we really need argument, struct dsim_device?
It doesn't. setup-mipi.c is specific to SoC platform.
these functions should be registered to mipi-dsi platform data as
callbacks in other words, mipi-dsi driver calls them so according to
mipi-dsi master framework rule, I added dsim_device as argument.
anyway, don't care.
+{
+ writel(S5P_MIPI_M_RESETN, S5P_MIPI_PHY_CON0);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+int s5p_mipi_init_d_phy(struct dsim_device *dsim)
+{
+ /**
+ * DPHY and Master block must be enabled at the system
initialization
+ * step before data access from/to DPHY begins.
+ */
+ s5p_mipi_enable_d_phy(dsim, 1);
+
+ s5p_mipi_enable_dsi_master(dsim, 1);
+
+ return 0;
+}
--
I can't get these needs...I mean need to re-think this for support MIPI
DSI(M) and MIPI CSI(S).
Actually MIPI control is needed in both.
I agree to your opinion.
it would be corrected, "MIPI" -> "DSIM"
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
