On 2014년 05월 27일 18:55, Rahul Sharma wrote:
<Gentle Reminder>
On 26 May 2014 14:21, Rahul Sharma rahul.sharma@samsung.com wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On 26 May 2014 13:11, Daniel Kurtz djkurtz@chromium.org wrote:
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Rahul Sharma rahul.sharma@samsung.com wrote:
Hi Inki,
Please review this patch.
[snip]
ret = clk_prepare_enable(ctx->lcd_clk);Hi Rahul,
Can you explain why exactly we are "clearing windows" here in probe(), anyway?
I am not sure why it was added there but it is present since the first version of this file. Probably Inki can explain about this :). I can see the change coming from his first patch for adding drm fimd driver.
IIUC, bus_clk is the clock that enables FIMD register access, and lcd_clk clocks the scan out engine. Therefore, if we only need to read/write some registers, we only need the bus_clk, not lcd_clk, right?
Correct, bus_clk should be sufficient to access the registers. But unless we are confident about all implicit clock requirements in all SoCs, it is safer to follow the power_on/off sequence. This implementation is as good as DPMS on -> perform reg operation -> DPMS Off. It was same in the original version but later clock enables were moved out of the probe.
However, fimd_clear_win() actually clears per-window registers. Writes to per-window registers typically do not take effect until the next vblank. Therefore we do would need to enable lcd_clk to ensure that these changes take effect. Furthermore, to ensure the window clear completes during probe(), we would also need to synchronously wait for the next vblank here - but only if FIMD scanout is actually enabled already, otherwise there will never be a next scanout, so we must check for that first. Lastly, waiting around for a vblank could take a while. Doing so in probe() is not very friendly to boot up time, so the waiting should probably be moved out of the main probe() thread into some sort of asynchronous handler, which could then signal back when the clear is complete.
Do you agree, or am I missing something?
I agree. There seems a room for improvement. But at present we have two options, either fix the current implementation and try to improve it as you mentioned above. OR remove fimd_clear_win from probe if it is just a legacy code which
Just let's remove fimd_clear_win. it wouldn't need to disable all hardware overlays at probe.
Thanks, Inki Dae
is no more required.
@Inki, need your inputs here.
Regards, Rahul Sharma.
Thanks, -djk
if (ret) {[snip]
+pm_put_err:
return ret;}
static void fimd_unbind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
1.7.9.5
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel