commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of
IP clock.
Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
"samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
Suggested-by: Alim Akhtar <[email protected]>
Fixes: 5441e9dafdfc ("[media] s5p-mfc: Core support for MFC v7")
Signed-off-by: Aakarsh Jain <[email protected]>
---
.../media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c b/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
index fca5c6405eec..007c7dbee037 100644
--- a/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
@@ -1576,8 +1576,18 @@ static struct s5p_mfc_variant mfc_drvdata_v7 = {
.port_num = MFC_NUM_PORTS_V7,
.buf_size = &buf_size_v7,
.fw_name[0] = "s5p-mfc-v7.fw",
- .clk_names = {"mfc", "sclk_mfc"},
- .num_clocks = 2,
+ .clk_names = {"mfc"},
+ .num_clocks = 1,
+};
+
+static struct s5p_mfc_variant mfc_drvdata_v7_3250 = {
+ .version = MFC_VERSION_V7,
+ .version_bit = MFC_V7_BIT,
+ .port_num = MFC_NUM_PORTS_V7,
+ .buf_size = &buf_size_v7,
+ .fw_name[0] = "s5p-mfc-v7.fw",
+ .clk_names = {"mfc", "sclk_mfc"},
+ .num_clocks = 2,
};
static struct s5p_mfc_buf_size_v6 mfc_buf_size_v8 = {
@@ -1647,6 +1657,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id exynos_mfc_match[] = {
}, {
.compatible = "samsung,mfc-v7",
.data = &mfc_drvdata_v7,
+ }, {
+ .compatible = "samsung,exynos3250-mfc",
+ .data = &mfc_drvdata_v7_3250,
}, {
.compatible = "samsung,mfc-v8",
.data = &mfc_drvdata_v8,
--
2.17.1
Hi Aakarsh,
On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 06:36:01PM +0530, Aakarsh Jain wrote:
> commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
> Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
> Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of
> IP clock.
> Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
> "samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
>
> Suggested-by: Alim Akhtar <[email protected]>
> Fixes: 5441e9dafdfc ("[media] s5p-mfc: Core support for MFC v7")
> Signed-off-by: Aakarsh Jain <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c b/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
> index fca5c6405eec..007c7dbee037 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c
> @@ -1576,8 +1576,18 @@ static struct s5p_mfc_variant mfc_drvdata_v7 = {
> .port_num = MFC_NUM_PORTS_V7,
> .buf_size = &buf_size_v7,
> .fw_name[0] = "s5p-mfc-v7.fw",
> - .clk_names = {"mfc", "sclk_mfc"},
> - .num_clocks = 2,
> + .clk_names = {"mfc"},
> + .num_clocks = 1,
> +};
> +
> +static struct s5p_mfc_variant mfc_drvdata_v7_3250 = {
> + .version = MFC_VERSION_V7,
> + .version_bit = MFC_V7_BIT,
> + .port_num = MFC_NUM_PORTS_V7,
> + .buf_size = &buf_size_v7,
> + .fw_name[0] = "s5p-mfc-v7.fw",
> + .clk_names = {"mfc", "sclk_mfc"},
> + .num_clocks = 2,
> };
>
> static struct s5p_mfc_buf_size_v6 mfc_buf_size_v8 = {
> @@ -1647,6 +1657,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id exynos_mfc_match[] = {
> }, {
> .compatible = "samsung,mfc-v7",
> .data = &mfc_drvdata_v7,
> + }, {
> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos3250-mfc",
> + .data = &mfc_drvdata_v7_3250,
> }, {
> .compatible = "samsung,mfc-v8",
> .data = &mfc_drvdata_v8,
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Patch looks good to me, only one fix in commit body:
"... Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string..."
with:
"... Exynos3250 and use the same compatible string...
But this is a nitpicking :)
Regards,
Tommaso
--
Tommaso Merciai
Embedded Linux Engineer
[email protected]
__________________________________
Amarula Solutions SRL
Via Le Canevare 30, 31100 Treviso, Veneto, IT
T. +39 042 243 5310
[email protected]
http://www.amarulasolutions.com
On 03.11.2022 13:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/11/2022 09:06, Aakarsh Jain wrote:
>> commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings.
>
>> Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
>> Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of
>> IP clock.
>> Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
>> "samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
> Aren't you just missing the clock on Exynos3250?
Nope, the Exynos3250 variant indeed has only one clock and the driver
code simply ignored the -ENOENT error while getting the clocks, see the
code in drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc_pm.c, so it
worked fine even without it.
IMHO it is a good idea to clean this up.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
On 03/11/2022 08:44, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> On 03.11.2022 13:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 02/11/2022 09:06, Aakarsh Jain wrote:
>>> commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
>> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings.
>>
>>> Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
>>> Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of
>>> IP clock.
>>> Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
>>> "samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
>> Aren't you just missing the clock on Exynos3250?
>
> Nope, the Exynos3250 variant indeed has only one clock and the driver
> code simply ignored the -ENOENT error while getting the clocks, see the
> code in drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc_pm.c, so it
> worked fine even without it.
>
> IMHO it is a good idea to clean this up.
OK, then please make the new compatible followed by old.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On 02/11/2022 09:06, Aakarsh Jain wrote:
> commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings.
> Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
> Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of
> IP clock.
> Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
> "samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
Aren't you just missing the clock on Exynos3250?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 03 November 2022 18:16
> To: Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>; Aakarsh Jain
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; linux-
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] media: s5p-mfc:Add variant data for MFC v7
> hardware for Exynos 3250 SOC
>
> On 03/11/2022 08:44, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > On 03.11.2022 13:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 02/11/2022 09:06, Aakarsh Jain wrote:
> >>> commit "5441e9dafdfc6dc40fa" which adds mfc v7 support for
> >> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings.
> >>
As I didn't see any checkpatch warnings from the above commit message.
Anyway I fixed all checkpatch warnings from drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc.c and posted 3 patches for the same.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-media/patch/[email protected]/
> >>> Exynos3250 and used the same compatible string as used by
> >>> Exynos5240 but both the IPs are a bit different in terms of IP
> >>> clock.
> >>> Lets add variant driver data based on the new compatible string
> >>> "samsung,exynos3250-mfc" for Exynos3250 SoC.
> >> Aren't you just missing the clock on Exynos3250?
> >
> > Nope, the Exynos3250 variant indeed has only one clock and the driver
> > code simply ignored the -ENOENT error while getting the clocks, see
> > the code in drivers/media/platform/samsung/s5p-mfc/s5p_mfc_pm.c, so it
> > worked fine even without it.
> >
> > IMHO it is a good idea to clean this up.
>
> OK, then please make the new compatible followed by old.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Thanks for the review.