lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [EXT] Re: [v1] drm/arm/mali-dp: Disable checking for required pixel clock rate
From
Date
On 16/05/2019 10:42, Wen He wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robin Murphy [mailto:robin.murphy@arm.com]
>> Sent: 2019年5月16日 1:14
>> To: Wen He <wen.he_1@nxp.com>; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org;
>> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; liviu.dudau@arm.com
>> Cc: Leo Li <leoyang.li@nxp.com>
>> Subject: [EXT] Re: [v1] drm/arm/mali-dp: Disable checking for required pixel
>> clock rate
>>
>> Caution: EXT Email
>>
>> On 15/05/2019 03:42, Wen He wrote:
>>> Disable checking for required pixel clock rate if ARCH_LAYERSCPAE is
>>> enable.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alison Wang <alison.wang@nxp.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wen He <wen.he_1@nxp.com>
>>> ---
>>> change in description:
>>> - This check that only supported one pixel clock required clock rate
>>> compare with dts node value. but we have supports 4 pixel clock
>>> for ls1028a board.
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_crtc.c | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_crtc.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_crtc.c
>>> index 56aad288666e..bb79223d9981 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_crtc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_crtc.c
>>> @@ -36,11 +36,13 @@ static enum drm_mode_status
>>> malidp_crtc_mode_valid(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>>>
>>> if (req_rate) {
>>> rate = clk_round_rate(hwdev->pxlclk, req_rate);
>>> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE
>>
>> What about multiplatform builds? The kernel config doesn't tell you what
>> hardware you're actually running on.
>>
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> In fact, Only one platform integrates this IP when CONFIG_ARCH_LAYERSCAPE is set.
> Although this are not good ways, but I think it won't be a problem under multiplatform builds.

My point is that ARCH_LAYERSCAPE is going to be enabled in distribution
kernels along with everything else, so you're effectively removing this
check for all other vendors' Mali-DP implementations as well, which is
probably not OK.

Furthermore, if LS1028A really only supports 4 specific modes as the BSP
documentation I found claims, then surely you'd want a *more* specific
check here, rather than no check at all?

Robin.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-16 12:47    [W:0.044 / U:14.320 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site