Hi Nickey,

El Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 03:55:19PM +0800 Nickey Yang ha dit:

> As MIPI PHY document show, icpctrl<3..0> and lpfctrl<5..0>
> should depend on frequency,so fix it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nickey Yang <nickey.y...@rock-chips.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 98 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> index 191037c..20d3f36 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c
> @@ -267,10 +267,21 @@
>  #define VCO_IN_CAP_CON_HIGH  (0x2 << 1)
>  #define REF_BIAS_CUR_SEL     BIT(0)
>  
> -#define CP_CURRENT_3MA               BIT(3)
> +#define CP_CURRENT_1_5UA     0x1
> +#define CP_CURRENT_4_5UA     0x2
> +#define CP_CURRENT_7_5UA     0x6
> +#define CP_CURRENT_6UA       0x9
> +#define CP_CURRENT_12UA      0xb
> +#define CP_CURRENT_SEL(val)  ((val) & 0xf)
>  #define CP_PROGRAM_EN                BIT(7)
> +
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM       0x1
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM 0x2
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM       0x4
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM       0x8
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_8KOHM  0x10
>  #define LPF_PROGRAM_EN               BIT(6)
> -#define LPF_RESISTORS_20_KOHM        0
> +#define LPF_RESISTORS_SEL(val)       ((val) & 0x3f)
>  
>  #define HSFREQRANGE_SEL(val) (((val) & 0x3f) << 1)
>  
> @@ -400,32 +411,63 @@ enum dw_mipi_dsi_mode {
>       DW_MIPI_DSI_VID_MODE,
>  };
>  
> -struct dphy_pll_testdin_map {
> +struct dphy_pll_parameter_map {
>       unsigned int max_mbps;
> -     u8 testdin;
> +     u8 hsfreqrange;
> +     u8 icpctrl;
> +     u8 lpfctrl;
>  };
>  
>  /* The table is based on 27MHz DPHY pll reference clock. */
> -static const struct dphy_pll_testdin_map dptdin_map[] = {
> -     {  90, 0x00}, { 100, 0x10}, { 110, 0x20}, { 130, 0x01},
> -     { 140, 0x11}, { 150, 0x21}, { 170, 0x02}, { 180, 0x12},
> -     { 200, 0x22}, { 220, 0x03}, { 240, 0x13}, { 250, 0x23},
> -     { 270, 0x04}, { 300, 0x14}, { 330, 0x05}, { 360, 0x15},
> -     { 400, 0x25}, { 450, 0x06}, { 500, 0x16}, { 550, 0x07},
> -     { 600, 0x17}, { 650, 0x08}, { 700, 0x18}, { 750, 0x09},
> -     { 800, 0x19}, { 850, 0x29}, { 900, 0x39}, { 950, 0x0a},
> -     {1000, 0x1a}, {1050, 0x2a}, {1100, 0x3a}, {1150, 0x0b},
> -     {1200, 0x1b}, {1250, 0x2b}, {1300, 0x3b}, {1350, 0x0c},
> -     {1400, 0x1c}, {1450, 0x2c}, {1500, 0x3c}
> +static const struct dphy_pll_parameter_map dppa_map[] = {
> +     {  90, 0x00, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},

max_mbps in this table is off by one. According to the databook the
ranges for the date rate are:

80-89
90-99
...
1450-1500

I think most people would interpret 'max_mbps' as the highest value of
the range, not the first value outside of the range on the upper side.

The code below 'fixes' this by using '>' instead of '>=' when looking
up the configuration for a data rate:

if (dppa_map[i].max_mbps > max_mbps)
        return i;

Both the table and this check are confusing, just use the actual max
value of the range and '>='.

Also the current code wouldn't work with a max rate of 1500 Mbps,
since (1500 > 1500) is false.

> +     { 100, 0x10, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 110, 0x20, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 130, 0x01, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 140, 0x11, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 150, 0x21, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 170, 0x02, CP_CURRENT_6UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 180, 0x12, CP_CURRENT_6UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 200, 0x22, CP_CURRENT_6UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 220, 0x03, CP_CURRENT_4_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 240, 0x13, CP_CURRENT_4_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 250, 0x23, CP_CURRENT_4_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_13KOHM},
> +     { 270, 0x04, CP_CURRENT_6UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 300, 0x14, CP_CURRENT_6UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 330, 0x05, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 360, 0x15, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 400, 0x25, CP_CURRENT_1_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_15_5KOHM},
> +     { 450, 0x06, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 500, 0x16, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 550, 0x07, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     { 600, 0x17, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     { 650, 0x08, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 700, 0x18, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 750, 0x09, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 800, 0x19, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 850, 0x29, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 900, 0x39, CP_CURRENT_7_5UA, LPF_RESISTORS_11_5KOHM},
> +     { 950, 0x0a, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_8KOHM},
> +     {1000, 0x1a, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_8KOHM},
> +     {1050, 0x2a, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_8KOHM},
> +     {1100, 0x3a, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_8KOHM},
> +     {1150, 0x0b, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1200, 0x1b, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1250, 0x2b, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1300, 0x3b, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1350, 0x0c, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1400, 0x1c, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1450, 0x2c, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM},
> +     {1500, 0x3c, CP_CURRENT_12UA, LPF_RESISTORS_10_5KOHM}
>  };
>  
> -static int max_mbps_to_testdin(unsigned int max_mbps)
> +static int max_mbps_to_parameter(unsigned int max_mbps)
>  {
>       int i;
>  
> -     for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(dptdin_map); i++)
> -             if (dptdin_map[i].max_mbps > max_mbps)
> -                     return dptdin_map[i].testdin;
> +     for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(dppa_map); i++)
> +             if (dppa_map[i].max_mbps > max_mbps)
> +                     return i;
>  
>       return -EINVAL;
>  }
> @@ -507,16 +549,16 @@ static inline unsigned int ns2ui(struct dw_mipi_dsi 
> *dsi, int ns)
>  
>  static int dw_mipi_dsi_phy_init(struct dw_mipi_dsi *dsi)
>  {
> -     int ret, testdin, vco, val;
> +     int ret, i, vco, val;
>  
>       vco = (dsi->lane_mbps < 200) ? 0 : (dsi->lane_mbps + 100) / 200;
>  
> -     testdin = max_mbps_to_testdin(dsi->lane_mbps);
> -     if (testdin < 0) {
> +     i = max_mbps_to_parameter(dsi->lane_mbps);
> +     if (i < 0) {
>               dev_err(dsi->dev,
> -                     "failed to get testdin for %dmbps lane clock\n",
> +                     "failed to get parameter for %dmbps lane clock\n",
>                       dsi->lane_mbps);
> -             return testdin;
> +             return i;
>       }
>  
>       /* Start by clearing PHY state */
> @@ -537,13 +579,13 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_phy_init(struct dw_mipi_dsi *dsi)
>                             REF_BIAS_CUR_SEL);
>  
>       dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write(dsi, PLL_CP_CONTROL_PLL_LOCK_BYPASS,
> -                           CP_CURRENT_3MA);
> +                           CP_CURRENT_SEL(dppa_map[i].icpctrl));
>       dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write(dsi, PLL_LPF_AND_CP_CONTROL,
>                             CP_PROGRAM_EN | LPF_PROGRAM_EN |
> -                           LPF_RESISTORS_20_KOHM);
> +                           LPF_RESISTORS_SEL(dppa_map[i].lpfctrl));
>  
>       dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write(dsi, HS_RX_CONTROL_OF_LANE_0,
> -                           HSFREQRANGE_SEL(testdin));
> +                           HSFREQRANGE_SEL(dppa_map[i].hsfreqrange));
>  
>       dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write(dsi, PLL_INPUT_DIVIDER_RATIO,
>                             INPUT_DIVIDER(dsi->input_div));
> @@ -632,7 +674,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_get_lane_bps(struct dw_mipi_dsi 
> *dsi,
>  {
>       unsigned long mpclk, tmp;
>       unsigned int target_mbps = 1000;
> -     unsigned int max_mbps = dptdin_map[ARRAY_SIZE(dptdin_map) - 1].max_mbps;
> +     unsigned int max_mbps = dppa_map[ARRAY_SIZE(dppa_map) - 1].max_mbps;
>       int bpp;
>       unsigned long best_freq = 0;
>       int lanes = dsi->lanes;

Reviewed-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org>

Reply via email to