On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:16 PM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 1/25/23 15:04, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 7:23 PM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 1/25/23 07:54, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 2:54 AM Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 2:54 AM Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 2:42 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 1/24/23 22:01, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 2:18 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 1/23/23 16:12, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Enable and disable of te_gpio's are Exynos platform specific > >>>>>>>>> irq handling, so add the exynos based irq operations and hook > >>>>>>>>> them for exynos plat_data. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If this is just an optional generic GPIO IRQ, why not keep it in the > >>>>>>>> core code ? TE (tearing enable?) should be available on MX8M too. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So far the discussion (since from initial versions) with Marek > >>>>>>> Szyprowski, seems to be available in Exynos. So, I keep it separate > >>>>>>> from the DSIM core. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Isn't TE a generic GPIO IRQ ? If so, it is available also on i.MX8M . > >>>> > >>>> I will check this. > >>> > >>> In order to use TE_GPIO we need te handler implementation, right now > >>> Exynos CRTC DRM drivers have implementation for this. That is the main > >>> reason to keep the TE_GPIO handling in exynos, maybe if we handle that > >>> generically then it is a viable option to move TE_GPIO to the DSIM > >>> core. > >> > >> I think you can do this exactly the same way exynos does it -- check > >> whether te_handler() callback is implemented by the glue code (the one > >> you already have for various exynos and imx8mm/imx8mm SoCs) and if so, > >> call it. If it is not implemented, do not call anything in the TE IRQ > >> handler. > > > > I need to understand how i.MX8MM handles this on TE IRQ in the DSIM > > host side, Can I do this in future patch set as it might involve > > bindings changes as well if it's part of DSIM? > > Why not leave an empty te_handler implementation on MX8M for now ? > You can fill that implementation in future patchset, but the generic > part of the code would be in place . Look like we have one issue to move regster te_irq into samsung-dsim. exynos_dsi_register_te_irq is done after the bridge attach is done in Exynos, here bridge attach is triggered in the component ops bind call, since samsung-dsim is a pure bridge w/o any component ops. https://github.com/openedev/kernel/blob/imx8mm-dsi-v12/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c#L1527 https://github.com/openedev/kernel/blob/imx8mm-dsi-v12/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c#L112 Any suggestion on how to handle this? Thanks, Jagan.
