On 05/18/2018 05:51 PM, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Sat, 2018-04-07 at 15:04 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >> The BT1120 interlaced CCIR codes are the same as BT656 ones >> and different than BT656 progressive CCIR codes, fix this. > > thank you for the patch, and sorry for the delay. > >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> >> Cc: Steve Longerbeam <steve_longerbeam@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/ipu-v3/ipu-csi.c | 8 ++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/ipu-v3/ipu-csi.c b/drivers/gpu/ipu-v3/ipu-csi.c >> index caa05b0702e1..301a729581ce 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/ipu-v3/ipu-csi.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/ipu-v3/ipu-csi.c >> @@ -435,12 +435,16 @@ int ipu_csi_init_interface(struct ipu_csi *csi, >> break; >> case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_PROGRESSIVE_DDR: >> case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_PROGRESSIVE_SDR: >> - case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_INTERLACED_DDR: >> - case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_INTERLACED_SDR: >> ipu_csi_write(csi, 0x40030 | CSI_CCIR_ERR_DET_EN, >> CSI_CCIR_CODE_1); >> ipu_csi_write(csi, 0xFF0000, CSI_CCIR_CODE_3); >> break; >> + case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_INTERLACED_DDR: >> + case IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR1120_INTERLACED_SDR: >> + ipu_csi_write(csi, 0x40596 | CSI_CCIR_ERR_DET_EN, CSI_CCIR_CODE_1); >> + ipu_csi_write(csi, 0xD07DF, CSI_CCIR_CODE_2); >> + ipu_csi_write(csi, 0xFF0000, CSI_CCIR_CODE_3); > > If these are the same as BT656 codes (so this case would be for PAL?), > could this just be moved up into the IPU_CSI_CLK_MODE_CCIR656_INTERLACED > case? Would the NTSC CCIR codes be the same as well? Dunno, I don't have any NTSC device to test. But the above was tested with a PAL device I had. I think the CCIR codes are different from BT656, although I might be wrong. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
