On 02/02/2017 03:50 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
+ struct v4l2_subdev *src_sd;
+ struct v4l2_subdev *sink_sd[CSI2_NUM_SRC_PADS];
I see no reason to store pointers to the remote v4l2_subdevs.
+ int input_pad;
+ struct clk *dphy_clk;
+ struct clk *cfg_clk;
+ struct clk *pix_clk; /* what is this? */
+ void __iomem *base;
+ int intr1;
+ int intr2;
The interrupts are not used, I'd remove them and the dead code in
_probe.
done.
+
+static inline u32 imxcsi2_read(struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2, unsigned int regoff)
+{
+ return readl(csi2->base + regoff);
+}
+
+static inline void imxcsi2_write(struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2, u32 val,
+ unsigned int regoff)
+{
+ writel(val, csi2->base + regoff);
+}
Do those two wrappers really make the code more readable?
It doesn't really matter to me either way, I removed these
macros.
+
+static void imxcsi2_enable(struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2, bool enable)
+{
+ if (enable) {
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0xffffffff, CSI2_PHY_SHUTDOWNZ);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0xffffffff, CSI2_DPHY_RSTZ);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0xffffffff, CSI2_RESETN);
Given that these registers only contain a single bit, and bits 31:1 are
documented as reserved, 0, I think these should write 1 instead of
0xffffffff.
Yes, these lines are lifted from the FSL BSP's mipi csi-2 driver. I
did notice this but left it in place because I was worried about
possible undocumented bits. I tried writing 1 to these registers
and the behavior is the same as before (still works).
+ } else {
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x0, CSI2_PHY_SHUTDOWNZ);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x0, CSI2_DPHY_RSTZ);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x0, CSI2_RESETN);
+ }
+}
+
+static void imxcsi2_reset(struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2)
+{
+ imxcsi2_enable(csi2, false);
+
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000001, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000000, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000000, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000002, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00010044, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000000, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000014, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000002, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
+ imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0x00000000, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
These magic constants should be replaced with proper defines for the
documented bitfields, if available.
#define PHY_TESTCLR BIT(0)
#define PHY_TESTCLK BIT(1)
#define PHY_TESTEN BIT(16)
/* Clear PHY test interface */
imxcsi2_write(csi2, PHY_TESTCLR, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
/* Raise test interface strobe signal */
imxcsi2_write(csi2, PHY_TESTCLK, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
/* Configure address write on falling edge and lower strobe signal */
u8 addr = 0x44;
imxcsi2_write(csi2, PHY_TESTEN | addr, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
/* Configure data write on rising edge and raise strobe signal */
u8 data = 0x14;
imxcsi2_write(csi2, data, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL1);
imxcsi2_write(csi2, PHY_TESTCLK, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
/* Clear strobe signal */
imxcsi2_write(csi2, 0, CSI2_PHY_TST_CTRL0);
The whole sequence should probably be encapsulated in a
dw_mipi_dphy_write function.
Actually, this exact function already exists as dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write in
drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c, and it looks like the D-PHY
register 0x44 might contain a field called HSFREQRANGE_SEL.
Thanks for pointing out drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c.
It's clear from that driver that there probably needs to be a fuller
treatment of the D-PHY programming here, but I don't know where
to find the MIPI CSI-2 D-PHY documentation for the i.MX6. The code
in imxcsi2_reset() was also pulled from FSL, and that's all I really have
to go on for the D-PHY programming. I assume the D-PHY is also a
Synopsys core, like the host controller, but the i.MX6 manual doesn't
cover it.
In any case I've created dw_mipi_csi2_phy_write(), modeled after
dw_mipi_dsi_phy_write(). The "0x14" value is a value derived for
a target max bandwidth per lane of 300 Mbps, at least that is what
drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi.c suggests. I've added a FIXME
note that effect, that this value should be derived based on the D-PHY
PLL clock rate and the desired max lane bandwidth.
+ imxcsi2_enable(csi2, true);
+}
+
+static int imxcsi2_dphy_wait(struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2)
+{
+ u32 reg;
+ int i;
+
+ /* wait for mipi sensor ready */
More specifically, wait for the clock lane module to leave ULP state.
I've split this function in two:
imxcsi2_dphy_wait_lp_11()
which waits for !PHY_RXULPSCLKNOT, and stable/error-free
CSI-2 bus (CSI2_ERR1 == 0),
and
imxcsi2_dphy_wait_clock_lane()
which waits for PHY_RXCLKACTIVEHS.
The former is called during s_power(1), the latter in s_stream(1).
+ for (i = 0; i < 50; i++) {
+ reg = imxcsi2_read(csi2, CSI2_PHY_STATE);
+ if (reg != 0x200)
Magic constants are bad. This is PHY_RXULPSCLKNOT (clock lane module in
ultra low power state).
Fixed.
+ break;
+ usleep_range(10000, 20000);
+ }
How about breaking this out into a wait function, or even better, using
readl_poll_timeout instead of open coding these loops multiple times?
Cool, thanks for pointing out that macro. I've switched to
readl_poll_timeout()
everywhere.
+
+ if (i >= 50) {
+ v4l2_err(&csi2->sd,
+ "wait for clock lane timeout, phy_state = 0x%08x\n",
+ reg);
+ return -ETIME;
+ }
+
+ /* wait for mipi stable */
Wait for error free transmission?
Changed to /* wait until no errors on bus */.
+
+ if (i >= 50) {
+ v4l2_err(&csi2->sd,
+ "wait for controller timeout, err1 = 0x%08x\n",
+ reg);
+ return -ETIME;
+ }
+
+ /* finally let's wait for active clock on the clock lane */
+ for (i = 0; i < 50; i++) {
+ reg = imxcsi2_read(csi2, CSI2_PHY_STATE);
+ if (reg & (1 << 8))
Yes, and that is PHY_RXCLKACTIVEHS.
done.
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * V4L2 subdev operations
+ */
+
+static int imxcsi2_link_setup(struct media_entity *entity,
+ const struct media_pad *local,
+ const struct media_pad *remote, u32 flags)
+{
+ struct v4l2_subdev *sd = media_entity_to_v4l2_subdev(entity);
+ struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2 = sd_to_dev(sd);
+ struct v4l2_subdev *remote_sd;
+
+ dev_dbg(csi2->dev, "link setup %s -> %s", remote->entity->name,
+ local->entity->name);
+
+ remote_sd = media_entity_to_v4l2_subdev(remote->entity);
+
+ if (local->flags & MEDIA_PAD_FL_SOURCE) {
+ if (flags & MEDIA_LNK_FL_ENABLED) {
+ if (csi2->sink_sd[local->index])
+ return -EBUSY;
+ csi2->sink_sd[local->index] = remote_sd;
+ } else {
+ csi2->sink_sd[local->index] = NULL;
+ }
+ } else {
+ if (flags & MEDIA_LNK_FL_ENABLED) {
+ if (csi2->src_sd)
+ return -EBUSY;
+ csi2->src_sd = remote_sd;
+ } else {
+ csi2->src_sd = NULL;
+ }
+ }
This whole code block is just to check if there is another link already
active on the given pad. This could be stored in a boolean or a bit, no
need to store pointers to remote subdevices.
I converted these to true booleans.
+
+static int imxcsi2_get_fmt(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
+ struct v4l2_subdev_pad_config *cfg,
+ struct v4l2_subdev_format *sdformat)
+{
+ struct imxcsi2_dev *csi2 = sd_to_dev(sd);
+
+ sdformat->format = csi2->format_mbus;
The output formats are different from the input formats, see the media
bus format discussion in the other thread. The input pad is the MIPI
CSI-2 bus, but the four output pads are connected to the muxes / CSIs
via a 16-bit parallel bus.
So if the input format is UYVY8_1X16, for example, the output should be
set to UYVY8_2X8.
Since the output buses from the CSI2IPU gasket are 16-bit
parallel buses, shouldn't an input format UYVY8_1X16 also be
the same at the output?
Steve
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
