On 2/18/2021 9:41 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 4:28 AM Akhil P Oommen <akhi...@codeaurora.org> wrote:
On 2/18/2021 2:05 AM, Jonathan Marek wrote:
On 2/17/21 3:18 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 11:08 AM Jordan Crouse
<jcro...@codeaurora.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 07:14:16PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote:
On 2/17/2021 8:36 AM, Rob Clark wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:10 PM Jonathan Marek <jonat...@marek.ca>
wrote:
Ignore nvmem_cell_get() EOPNOTSUPP error in the same way as a
ENOENT error,
to fix the case where the kernel was compiled without CONFIG_NVMEM.
Fixes: fe7952c629da ("drm/msm: Add speed-bin support to a618 gpu")
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Marek <jonat...@marek.ca>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
index ba8e9d3cf0fe..7fe5d97606aa 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
@@ -1356,10 +1356,10 @@ static int a6xx_set_supported_hw(struct
device *dev, struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu,
cell = nvmem_cell_get(dev, "speed_bin");
/*
- * -ENOENT means that the platform doesn't support
speedbin which is
- * fine
+ * -ENOENT means no speed bin in device tree,
+ * -EOPNOTSUPP means kernel was built without CONFIG_NVMEM
very minor nit, it would be nice to at least preserve the gist of the
"which is fine" (ie. some variation of "this is an optional thing and
things won't catch fire without it" ;-))
(which is, I believe, is true, hopefully Akhil could confirm.. if not
we should have a harder dependency on CONFIG_NVMEM..)
IIRC, if the gpu opp table in the DT uses the 'opp-supported-hw'
property,
we will see some error during boot up if we don't call
dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw(). So calling "nvmem_cell_get(dev,
"speed_bin")"
is a way to test this.
If there is no other harm, we can put a hard dependency on
CONFIG_NVMEM.
I'm not sure if we want to go this far given the squishiness about
module
dependencies. As far as I know we are the only driver that uses this
seriously
on QCOM SoCs and this is only needed for certain targets. I don't
know if we
want to force every target to build NVMEM and QFPROM on our behalf.
But maybe
I'm just saying that because Kconfig dependencies tend to break my
brain (and
then Arnd has to send a patch to fix it).
Hmm, good point.. looks like CONFIG_NVMEM itself doesn't have any
other dependencies, so I suppose it wouldn't be the end of the world
to select that.. but I guess we don't want to require QFPROM
I guess at the end of the day, what is the failure mode if you have a
speed-bin device, but your kernel config misses QFPROM (and possibly
NVMEM)? If the result is just not having the highest clk rate(s)
Atleast on sc7180's gpu, using an unsupported FMAX breaks gmu. It won't
be very obvious what went wrong when this happens!
Ugg, ok..
I suppose we could select NVMEM, but not QFPROM, and then the case
where QFPROM is not enabled on platforms that have the speed-bin field
in DT will fail gracefully and all other platforms would continue on
happily?
BR,
-R
Sounds good to me.
-Akhil.
available, that isn't the end of the world. But if it makes things
not-work, that is sub-optimal. Generally, especially on ARM, kconfig
seems to be way harder than it should be to build a kernel that works,
if we could somehow not add to that problem (for both people with a6xx
and older gens) that would be nice ;-)
There is a "imply" kconfig option which solves exactly this problem.
(you would "imply NVMEM" instead of "select NVMEM". then it would be
possible to disable NVMEM but it would get enabled by default)
BR,
-R
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
