Hi Biju,
Thank you for the review.
On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 2:00 PM Biju Das <biju.das...@bp.renesas.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Prabhakar <prabhakar.cse...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: 30 April 2025 21:41
> > Subject: [PATCH v4 14/15] drm: renesas: rz-du: mipi_dsi: Add support for
> > LPCLK handling
> >
> > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad...@bp.renesas.com>
> >
> > Introduce the `RZ_MIPI_DSI_FEATURE_LPCLK` feature flag in
> > `rzg2l_mipi_dsi_hw_info` to indicate the
> > need for LPCLK configuration.
> >
> > On the RZ/V2H(P) SoC, the LPCLK clock rate influences the required DPHY
> > register configuration,
> > whereas on the RZ/G2L SoC, this clock is not present. To accommodate this
> > difference, add an `lpclk`
> > clock handle in `rzg2l_mipi_dsi` and update the probe function to
> > conditionally acquire LPCLK if the
> > SoC supports it.
> >
> > Co-developed-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro...@renesas.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro...@renesas.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad...@bp.renesas.com>
> > ---
> > v3->v4
> > - No changes
> >
> > v2->v3:
> > - No changes
> >
> > v1->v2:
> > - Added LPCLK as feature flag
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rz-du/rzg2l_mipi_dsi.c | 8 ++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rz-du/rzg2l_mipi_dsi.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rz-
> > du/rzg2l_mipi_dsi.c
> > index df43ff59e08e..22a386ca8ae3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rz-du/rzg2l_mipi_dsi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rz-du/rzg2l_mipi_dsi.c
> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
> >
> > #define RZ_MIPI_DSI_FEATURE_DPHY_RST BIT(0)
> > #define RZ_MIPI_DSI_FEATURE_16BPP BIT(1)
> > +#define RZ_MIPI_DSI_FEATURE_LPCLK BIT(2)
> >
> > struct rzg2l_mipi_dsi;
> >
> > @@ -63,6 +64,7 @@ struct rzg2l_mipi_dsi {
> > struct drm_bridge *next_bridge;
> >
> > struct clk *vclk;
> > + struct clk *lpclk;
> >
> > enum mipi_dsi_pixel_format format;
> > unsigned int num_data_lanes;
> > @@ -788,6 +790,12 @@ static int rzg2l_mipi_dsi_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev)
> > if (IS_ERR(dsi->vclk))
> > return PTR_ERR(dsi->vclk);
> >
> > + if (dsi->info->features & RZ_MIPI_DSI_FEATURE_LPCLK) {
> > + dsi->lpclk = devm_clk_get(dsi->dev, "lpclk");
> > + if (IS_ERR(dsi->lpclk))
> > + return PTR_ERR(dsi->lpclk);
> > + }
> > +
>
> Can we use devm_clk_get_optional() and get rid of this Feature bit check
> as DT binding check validates for a particular SoC this clk is required or
> not?
> Otherwise, there is no usage for optional API's?
>
OK, I'll switch to devm_clk_get_optional().
Cheers,
Prabhakar
