On 04/01/2023 10:45, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On 04/01/2023 11:08, Neil Armstrong wrote:
Add definitions for the display hardware used on Qualcomm SM8550
platform.

Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstr...@linaro.org>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 197 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.h |   1 +
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_mdss.h    |   2 +
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c        |   1 +
  4 files changed, 201 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
index b4ca123d8e69..adf5e25269dc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c

<snip>

@@ -776,6 +821,45 @@ static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sm8450_ctl[] = {
      },
  };
+static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sm8550_ctl[] = {
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_0", .id = CTL_0,
+    .base = 0x15000, .len = 0x290,?
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) | 
BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),

CTL_SC7280_MASK | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) ?

Indeed DPU_CTL_VM_CFG is missing, will switch to that.


+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 9),
+    },
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_1", .id = CTL_1,
+    .base = 0x16000, .len = 0x290,
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) | 
BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 10),
+    },
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_2", .id = CTL_2,
+    .base = 0x17000, .len = 0x290,
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),

CTL_SC7280_MASK?

Ack


+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 11),
+    },
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_3", .id = CTL_3,
+    .base = 0x18000, .len = 0x290,
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 12),
+    },
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_4", .id = CTL_4,
+    .base = 0x19000, .len = 0x290,
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 13),
+    },
+    {
+    .name = "ctl_5", .id = CTL_5,
+    .base = 0x1a000, .len = 0x290,
+    .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
+    .intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 23),
+    },
+};
+
  static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sc7280_ctl[] = {
      {
      .name = "ctl_0", .id = CTL_0,

<snip>

@@ -1268,6 +1386,16 @@ static const struct dpu_pingpong_sub_blks sc7280_pp_sblk 
= {
      .len = 0x20, .version = 0x20000},
  };
+#define PP_BLK_DIPHER(_name, _id, _base, _merge_3d, _sblk, _done, _rdptr) \
+    {\
+    .name = _name, .id = _id, \
+    .base = _base, .len = 0, \

len = 0 looks incorrect. Any particular reason why can't we use plain PP_BLK 
here?

The TE block has been moved to the DSI INTF blocks since SM8350 I think, or 
earlier.

This removes the DPU_PINGPONG_DITHER feature used downstream to enable the PP 
TE callbacks.

Since there's only the DIPHER sub-block remaining, this is why I set len to 0.


+    .features = BIT(DPU_PINGPONG_DITHER), \
+    .merge_3d = _merge_3d, \
+    .sblk = &_sblk, \
+    .intr_done = _done, \
+    .intr_rdptr = _rdptr, \
+    }
  #define PP_BLK_TE(_name, _id, _base, _merge_3d, _sblk, _done, _rdptr) \
      {\
      .name = _name, .id = _id, \

<snip>

Reply via email to