Hello,
On Wednesday, 14 March 2018 00:23:49 EEST Kieran Bingham wrote:
> Hi Niklas
>
> Thank you for this patch ...
> I know it has been a lot of work getting this and the VIN together!
>
> On 13/02/18 00:01, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> > A V4L2 driver for Renesas R-Car MIPI CSI-2 receiver. The driver
> > supports the R-Car Gen3 SoCs where separate CSI-2 hardware blocks are
> > connected between the video sources and the video grabbers (VIN).
> >
> > Driver is based on a prototype by Koji Matsuoka in the Renesas BSP.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I don't think there's actually anything major in the below - so with any
> comments addressed, or specifically ignored you can add my:
>
> Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> tag if you like.
>
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/Kconfig | 12 +
> > drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-csi2.c | 884 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 897 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-csi2.c
[snip]
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-csi2.c
> > b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-csi2.c new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000000000..c0c2a763151bc928
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-csi2.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,884 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Do you intend making it GPL-2.0+ or did you mean GPL-2.0 ?
> > +/*
> > + * Driver for Renesas R-Car MIPI CSI-2 Receiver
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2018 Renesas Electronics Corp.
> > + */
[snip]
> > +static const struct rcar_csi2_format *rcar_csi2_code_to_fmt(unsigned int
> > code)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(rcar_csi2_formats); i++)
> > + if (rcar_csi2_formats[i].code == code)
> > + return rcar_csi2_formats + i;
>
> I would have written this as:
> return &rcar_csi2_formats[i]; but I think your way is valid too :)
I would have done the same.
> I have a nice 'for_each_entity_in_array' macro I keep meaning to post which
> would be nice here too - but hey - for another day.
>
> > +
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
[snip]
> > +static int rcar_csi2_wait_phy_start(struct rcar_csi2 *priv)
> > +{
> > + int timeout;
> > +
> > + /* Wait for the clock and data lanes to enter LP-11 state. */
> > + for (timeout = 100; timeout > 0; timeout--) {
> > + const u32 lane_mask = (1 << priv->lanes) - 1;
> > +
> > + if ((rcar_csi2_read(priv, PHCLM_REG) & 1) == 1 &&
>
> The '1' is not very clear here.. Could this be:
>
> if ((rcar_csi2_read(priv, PHCLM_REG) & PHCLM_STOPSTATE) &&
That reads a bit better, yes.
> > + (rcar_csi2_read(priv, PHDLM_REG) & lane_mask) == lane_mask)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + msleep(20);
> > + }
> > +
> > + dev_err(priv->dev, "Timeout waiting for LP-11 state\n");
>
> Does LP == ULP ? I presume these mean 'low power' / 'ultra low power' ?
> Although the PHCLM lane mask refers to the STOPSTATE, so I guess this is
> also waiting for the lanes to be idle.
LP-11 refers to the low-power single-ended state where both the + and - lanes
are at high level. It is the bus idle state for D-PHY. The ultra-low power
state is ULPS and is different (if I remember correctly the lines go to the
LP-00 state).
> > +
> > + return -ETIMEDOUT;
> > +}
[snip]
> > +static int rcar_csi2_start(struct rcar_csi2 *priv)
> > +{
> > + const struct rcar_csi2_format *format;
> > + u32 phycnt, phypll, vcdt = 0, vcdt2 = 0;
> > + unsigned int i;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + dev_dbg(priv->dev, "Input size (%ux%u%c)\n",
> > + priv->mf.width, priv->mf.height,
> > + priv->mf.field == V4L2_FIELD_NONE ? 'p' : 'i');
> > +
> > + /* Code is validated in set_fmt */
> > + format = rcar_csi2_code_to_fmt(priv->mf.code);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Enable all Virtual Channels
> > + *
> > + * NOTE: It's not possible to get individual datatype for each
> > + * source virtual channel. Once this is possible in V4L2
> > + * it should be used here.
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
>
> Does 4 represent the maximum number of lanes? or can we have 4 VCs on a
> single lane ?
Virtual channels and data lanes are independent. Of course the more virtual
channels you need to carry the more bandwidth you will likely need, so you
might need more data lanes, but there's no direct correlation.
> > + u32 vcdt_part;
> > +
> > + vcdt_part = VCDT_SEL_VC(i) | VCDT_VCDTN_EN | VCDT_SEL_DTN_ON |
> > + VCDT_SEL_DT(format->datatype);
> > +
> > + /* Store in correct reg and offset */
> > + if (i < 2)
> > + vcdt |= vcdt_part << ((i % 2) * 16);
> > + else
> > + vcdt2 |= vcdt_part << ((i % 2) * 16);
> > + }
> > +
> > + switch (priv->lanes) {
> > + case 1:
> > + phycnt = PHYCNT_ENABLECLK | PHYCNT_ENABLE_0;
> > + break;
> > + case 2:
> > + phycnt = PHYCNT_ENABLECLK | PHYCNT_ENABLE_1 | PHYCNT_ENABLE_0;
> > + break;
> > + case 4:
> > + phycnt = PHYCNT_ENABLECLK | PHYCNT_ENABLE_3 | PHYCNT_ENABLE_2 |
> > + PHYCNT_ENABLE_1 | PHYCNT_ENABLE_0;
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = rcar_csi2_calc_phypll(priv, format->bpp, &phypll);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Clear Ultra Low Power interrupt */
> > + if (priv->info->clear_ulps)
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, INTSTATE_REG,
> > + INTSTATE_INT_ULPS_START |
> > + INTSTATE_INT_ULPS_END);
> > +
> > + /* Init */
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, TREF_REG, TREF_TREF);
> > + rcar_csi2_reset(priv);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTC_REG, 0);
> > +
> > + /* Configure */
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, FLD_REG, FLD_FLD_NUM(2) | FLD_FLD_EN4 |
> > + FLD_FLD_EN3 | FLD_FLD_EN2 | FLD_FLD_EN);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, VCDT_REG, vcdt);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, VCDT2_REG, vcdt2);
> > + /* Lanes are zero indexed */
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, LSWAP_REG,
> > + LSWAP_L0SEL(priv->lane_swap[0] - 1) |
> > + LSWAP_L1SEL(priv->lane_swap[1] - 1) |
> > + LSWAP_L2SEL(priv->lane_swap[2] - 1) |
> > + LSWAP_L3SEL(priv->lane_swap[3] - 1));
> > +
> > + if (priv->info->init_phtw) {
> > + /*
> > + * This is for H3 ES2.0
> > + *
> > + * NOTE: Additional logic is needed here when
> > + * support for V3H and/or M3-N is added
> > + */
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x01cc01e2);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x010101e3);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x010101e4);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x01100104);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x01030100);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHTW_REG, 0x01800100);
>
> Voodoo magic ?
>
> I think just say yes here and move on ...
> I've looked at the flow chart in 25.3.9 ... I think I'll just believe this
> works :D especially as I've seen it working, but does it matter that the
> values aren't read back?
>
> Perhaps these could be moved to a (set of) table(s) and a loop to support
> the V3H/M3-N later (but not now)
I think we can fix this later, yes.
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Start */
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHYPLL_REG, phypll);
> > +
> > + /* Set frequency range if we have it */
> > + if (priv->info->csi0clkfreqrange)
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, CSI0CLKFCPR_REG,
> > + CSI0CLKFREQRANGE(priv->info->csi0clkfreqrange));
> > +
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHYCNT_REG, phycnt);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, LINKCNT_REG, LINKCNT_MONITOR_EN |
> > + LINKCNT_REG_MONI_PACT_EN | LINKCNT_ICLK_NONSTOP);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHYCNT_REG, phycnt | PHYCNT_SHUTDOWNZ);
> > + rcar_csi2_write(priv, PHYCNT_REG, phycnt | PHYCNT_SHUTDOWNZ |
> > + PHYCNT_RSTZ);
> > +
> > + return rcar_csi2_wait_phy_start(priv);
> > +}
[snip]
> > +static int rcar_csi2_s_stream(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, int enable)
> > +{
> > + struct rcar_csi2 *priv = sd_to_csi2(sd);
> > + struct v4l2_subdev *nextsd;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&priv->lock);
> > +
> > + if (!priv->remote) {
> > + ret = -ENODEV;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + nextsd = priv->remote;
> > +
> > + if (enable && priv->stream_count == 0) {
> > + pm_runtime_get_sync(priv->dev);
> > +
> > + ret = rcar_csi2_start(priv);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + pm_runtime_put(priv->dev);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = v4l2_subdev_call(nextsd, video, s_stream, 1);
>
> Would it be nicer to pass 'enable' through instead of the '1'? (of course
> enable==1 here)
The caller shouldn't set enable to a value other than 0 or 1, but in case it
does, 1 seems better to me (and I find it more readable too).
> > + if (ret) {
> > + rcar_csi2_stop(priv);
> > + pm_runtime_put(priv->dev);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + } else if (!enable && priv->stream_count == 1) {
> > + rcar_csi2_stop(priv);
> > + v4l2_subdev_call(nextsd, video, s_stream, 0);
>
> likewise here...
Likewise, I find 0 more readable :-)
> > + pm_runtime_put(priv->dev);
> > + }
>
> What's the 'nextsd' in this instance? We only call the s_stream on nextsd if
> it is the first one to be started, or the last one to be stopped...
>
> I can understand this logic for calling rcar_csi2_stop/rcar_csi2_start ...
> but shouldn't we always call :
> v4l2_subdev_call(nextsd, video, s_stream, enable); ?
>
> in GMSL context, I guess 'nextsd' is the MAX9286?
> At which point - it would be called for start/stop, priv->stream_count
> times, and would also have to provide it's own call balancing...
>
> Call me crazy and ignore me here if you like :-)
I'll let Niklas explain :-)
> > +
> > + priv->stream_count += enable ? 1 : -1;
> > +out:
> > + mutex_unlock(&priv->lock);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
[snip]
> > +static const struct rcar_csi2_info rcar_csi2_info_r8a7795 = {
> > + .hsfreqrange = hsfreqrange_h3_v3h_m3n,
> > + .clear_ulps = true,
> > + .init_phtw = true,
> > + .csi0clkfreqrange = 0x20,
>
> 0x20 ?
The datasheet states that the field should be set to 0x20 and doesn't offer
any other explanation :-/
> > +};
[snip]
> > +static int rcar_csi2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + const struct soc_device_attribute *attr;
> > + struct rcar_csi2 *priv;
> > + unsigned int i;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + priv = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!priv)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + priv->info = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> > +
> > + /* r8a7795 ES1.x behaves different then ES2.0+ but no own compat */
>
> /*
> * r8a7795 ES1.x behaves differently than the ES2.0+ but doesn't have it's
> own
> * compatible string
> */
With a period at the end of the sentence if would be perfect :-)
> > + attr = soc_device_match(r8a7795es1);
> > + if (attr)
> > + priv->info = attr->data;
> > +
> > + priv->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > + mutex_init(&priv->lock);
> > + priv->stream_count = 0;
> > +
> > + ret = rcar_csi2_probe_resources(priv, pdev);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to get resources\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv);
> > +
> > + ret = rcar_csi2_parse_dt(priv);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + priv->subdev.owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > + priv->subdev.dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + v4l2_subdev_init(&priv->subdev, &rcar_csi2_subdev_ops);
> > + v4l2_set_subdevdata(&priv->subdev, &pdev->dev);
> > + snprintf(priv->subdev.name, V4L2_SUBDEV_NAME_SIZE, "%s %s",
> > + KBUILD_MODNAME, dev_name(&pdev->dev));
> > + priv->subdev.flags = V4L2_SUBDEV_FL_HAS_DEVNODE;
> > +
> > + priv->subdev.entity.function = MEDIA_ENT_F_PROC_VIDEO_PIXEL_FORMATTER;
> > + priv->subdev.entity.ops = &rcar_csi2_entity_ops;
> > +
> > + priv->pads[RCAR_CSI2_SINK].flags = MEDIA_PAD_FL_SINK;
> > + for (i = RCAR_CSI2_SOURCE_VC0; i < NR_OF_RCAR_CSI2_PAD; i++)
> > + priv->pads[i].flags = MEDIA_PAD_FL_SOURCE;
> > +
> > + ret = media_entity_pads_init(&priv->subdev.entity, NR_OF_RCAR_CSI2_PAD,
> > + priv->pads);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto error;
> > +
> > + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> > +
> > + ret = v4l2_async_register_subdev(&priv->subdev);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + goto error;
> > +
> > + dev_info(priv->dev, "%d lanes found\n", priv->lanes);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +error:
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_unregister(&priv->notifier);
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_cleanup(&priv->notifier);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
[snip]
> Well ... phew ... done :) I can go to bed.
I wish I could do the same :-)
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
