On 02/06/2013 09:56 AM, Sean Paul wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org>
> wrote:
>> On 02/05/2013 05:37 PM, Sean Paul wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> n 02/05/2013 04:42 PM, Sean Paul wrote:
>>>>> Use the compatible string in the device tree to determine which
>>>>> registers/functions to use in the HDMI driver. Also changes the
>>>>> references from v13 to 4210 and v14 to 4212 to reflect the IP
>>>>> block version instead of the HDMI version.
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/hdmi.txt
>>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/exynos/hdmi.txt
>>>> Binding looks sane to me.
>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_hdmi.c
>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>>>> static struct of_device_id hdmi_match_types[] = {
>>>>> {
>>>>> - .compatible = "samsung,exynos5-hdmi",
>>>>> - .data = (void *)HDMI_TYPE14,
>>>>> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos4-hdmi",
>>>>> }, {
>>>>> /* end node */
>>>>> }
>>>> Why not fill in all the "base" compatible values there (I think you need
>>>> this anyway so that DTs don't all have to be compatible with
>>>> samsung,exynos4-hdmi), with .data containing the HDMI_VER_EXYNOS*
>>>> values, then ...
>>>>
>>> At the moment, all DTs have to be compatible with exynos4-hdmi since
>>> it provides the base for the current driver. The driver uses 4210 and
>>> 4212 to differentiate between different register addresses and
>>> features, but most things are just exynos4-hdmi compatible.
>> The DT nodes should include only the compatible values that the HW is
>> actually compatible with. If the HW isn't compatible with exynos4-hdmi,
>> that value shouldn't be in the compatible property, but instead whatever
>> the "base" value that the HW really is compatible with. The driver can
>> support multiple "base" compatible values from this table.
>>
> All devices that use this driver are compatible, at some level, with
> exynos4-hdmi, so I think its usage is correct here.
>
>>>>> @@ -2218,17 +2217,18 @@ static int hdmi_probe(struct platform_device
>>>>> *pdev)
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node,
>>>>> "samsung,exynos4210-hdmi"))
>>>>> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4210;
>>>>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node,
>>>>> "samsung,exynos4212-hdmi"))
>>>>> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4212;
>>>>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node,
>>>>> "samsung,exynos5250-hdmi"))
>>>>> + hdata->version |= HDMI_VER_EXYNOS5250;
But this way can make unnecessary combinations, e.g. exynos4210-hdmi +
exynos5250-hdmi.
>>>> Instead of that, do roughly:
>>>>
>>>> match = of_match_device(hdmi_match_types, &pdev->dev);
>>>> if (match)
>>>> hdata->version |= (int)match->data;
>>>>
>>>> That way, it's all table-based. Any future additions to
>>>> hdmi_match_types[] won't require another if statement to be added to
>>>> probe().
>>> I don't think it's that easy. of_match_device returns the first match
>>> from the device table, so I'd still need to iterate through the
>>> matches. I could still break this out into a table, but I don't think
>>> of_match_device is the right way to probe it.
>> You shouldn't have to iterate over multiple matches. of_match_device()
>> is supposed to return the match for the first entry in the compatible
>> property, then if there was no match, move on to looking at the next
>> entry in the compatible property, etc. In practice, I think it's still
>> not implemented quite correctly for this, but you can make it work by
>> putting the newest compatible value first in the match table.
> I think the only way that works is if you hardcode the compatible
> versions in the driver, like this:
>
> static struct of_device_id hdmi_match_types[] = {
> {
> .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-hdmi",
> .data = (void *)(HDMI_VER_EXYNOS5250 | HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4212);
> }, {
> .compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-hdmi",
> .data = (void *)HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4212;
> }, {
> .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-hdmi",
> .data = (void *)HDMI_VER_EXYNOS4210;
> }, {
> /* end node */
> }
> };
I think this makes driver more clearly. We just see device tables and we
can know device uses which version.
>
> In that case, it eliminates the benefit of using device tree to
> determine the compatible bits. I hope I'm just being thick and missing
> something.
>
> Sean
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
