On 21 February 2013 12:34, Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 19 February 2013 03:16, Sylwester Nawrocki
> <sylvester.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 02/18/2013 11:51 AM, Vikas Sajjan wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15 February 2013 16:08, Sylwester Nawrocki<s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 02/15/2013 08:10 AM, Vikas Sajjan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Adds FIMD DT binding documentation both SoC and Board, with an example
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan<vikas.sajjan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/fimd.txt | 37
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>>>>> create mode 100644
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/fimd.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/fimd.txt
>>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/fimd.txt
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..bec9d07
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/fimd.txt
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't Documentation/devicetree/bindings/video/exynos-fimd.txt be more
>> appropriate location for this file ? There is also framebuffer driver for
>> FIMD. Even if the framebuffer driver gets phased out it still feels like
>> a more intuitive location for a display controller bindings.
>> This is just my humble suggestion though.
>>
> I think we can move it there.
>
>> I think you should CC the device tree mailing list and the maintainers.
>>
>>
> will do.
>
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
>>>>> +Device-Tree bindings for fimd driver
>>>>> +
>>>>> +FIMD stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Display, is the Display
>>>>> Controller for
>>>>> +the Exynos series of SoCs which transfers the image data from a video
>>>>> buffer
>>>>> +located in the system memory to an external LCD interface.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +Required properties:
>>>>> +- compatible := value should be "samsung,exynos5-fimd" or
>>>>> "samsung,exynos4-fimd"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What about older SoCs like S5Pv210 ? There is the FIMD IP block in those
>>>> SoCs
>>>> as well. There are also differences in the FIMD IP block across various
>>>> SoC
>>>> version, so either you need to list the quirks in the bindings or use an
>>>> appropriate compatible properties if there are significant differences
>>>> across
>>>> FIMDs that make them not really compatible.
>>>>
>>> as of now, I was working on Exynos4 and Exynos5 SoC. have to really
>>> see the differences in the previous SoC and how to handle all those
>>> FIMD IPs in the driver.
>>> if you know the differences between these FIMD IPs, please let me know.
>>
>>
>> Please have a look at drivers/video/s3c-fb.c and all driver_data structures
>> defined for various SoCs.
>>
>> [...]
>>
> I went through the driver_data structures define for s5p64x0,s3c2443,
> s5pv210, s5pc100 ad 64xx SoCs.
> there are some differences w.r.t number of windows, osd_stride length
> and regsiter offsets.
> but I dont have access to all the above mentioned Boards and so that
> I can modify and test on each one of them.
>
as far as i know this file exynos_drm_fimd.c is meant only for exynos4
onwards SoCs,
( I think Mr. Inki Dae can throw more light on this )
and also the previous boards based on s5p64x0,s3c2443,s5pv210,
s5pc100 and 64xx, dont have DT support.
also in the function drm_fimd_get_driver_data(), there is provision to
get the NON-DT "driver data" as well. So somebody who wants to use
this driver for the above mentioned SoCs can add the driver-data.
so wanted to know how you want me to go about it.
>>> we have 3 interrupts and the Interrupt combiner order is FIFO Level ,
>>> VSYNC and LCD_SYSTEM.
>>> since we only use VSYNC interrupt , In the driver to get the interrupt
>>> number
>>>
>>> res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 0);
>>> if (!res) {
>>> dev_err(dev, "irq request failed.\n");
>>> return -ENXIO;
>>> }
>>>
>>> ctx->irq = res->start;
>>>
>>> I am passing the 3rd parameter as '0' , to get the VSYNC interrupt,
>>> and hence in the DTSI file i have it in the order VSYNC, FIFO
>>> LEVEL and LCD_SYSTEM.
>>
>>
>> Yes, I'm aware what's going on here. Since I had to change the interrupts
>> order when I used one of the first version of patches adding device tree
>> support for FIMD, when I needed working display to test the camera.
>>
>>
>>> what I can do is the pass the 3rd parameter as '1' , and rectify the
>>> order in DTSI file as FIFO LEVEL, VSYNC and LCD_SYSTEM.
>>
>>
>> Then you would have to do it only for dt case. I guess it is okay to
>> require VSYNC as the first interrupt. I'm fine with that, as long as
>> it is properly documented.
>>
> So, I shall keep the logic as is, and just document it well. is it ok.?
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sylwester
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Vikas Sajjan
--
Thanks and Regards
Vikas Sajjan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
