[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC v9 11/20] drm/bridge: Add Synopsys DesignWare MIPI DSI host controller driver

On 04/09/2015 02:13 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 02:01:34PM +0800, Liu Ying wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_mipi_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/dw_mipi_dsi.c
> [...]
>> +struct dw_mipi_dsi {
>> + struct mipi_dsi_host dsi_host;
>> + struct drm_connector connector;
>> + struct drm_encoder *encoder;
>> + struct drm_bridge *bridge;
>> + struct drm_panel *panel;
>> + struct device *dev;
>> +
>> + void __iomem *base;
>> +
>> + struct clk *pllref_clk;
>> + struct clk *cfg_clk;
>> + struct clk *pclk;
>> +
>> + unsigned int lane_mbps; /* per lane */
>> + u32 channel;
>> + u32 lanes;
>> + u32 format;
>> + struct drm_display_mode *mode;
>> +
>> + const struct dw_mipi_dsi_plat_data *pdata;
>> +
>> + bool enabled;
>> +};
> While reviewing this I kept thinking whether this is really the right
> architectural design. This driver is a MIPI DSI host, a connector and
> a bridge, all in one. But it seems to me like it should really be an
> encoder/connector and a MIPI DSI host. Why the need for a bridge? The
> bridge abstraction targets blocks outside of the SoC, but it is my
> understanding that these DesignWare IP blocks are designed into SoCs.

The msm driver uses bridges for blocks within the SoC too. We have too
many sub blocks in the display controller that use up crtcs and encoder
entities. A bridge is the only option one has if an encoder in the
display chain is already taken.

In the above designware configuration, if some one created a board that
used an external chip to further convert DSI to some other output
format, then we would be completely exhausted of all entities.

I posted a patch that allows us to create a chain of bridges for such
cases. It seems to work well as an interim solution. Ideally, it would
be better if we could make bridge a special case of an encoder, and let
one encoder connect to another encoder.

Such a thing would also help us unify i2c slave encoders and bridge
drivers too. A chip designed as an i2c slave encoder would work well
with a drm driver that doesn't have an encoder, but won't work for SoCs
SoCs that already have an encoder and were expecting a bridge entity


Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-16 08:21    [W:0.129 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site