Received: by 2002:ac0:946b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j40csp2646290imj; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:25:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYSQP1OzQDrq16Q/bd9DB0teXAZh0CJmspUqf1IBHcnOBea5Sl2YqaAddr267Bj1hrYQY+5 X-Received: by 2002:aa7:808a:: with SMTP id v10mr25045192pff.8.1549895103344; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:25:03 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549895103; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=fM4ugxeMwEhmZAxJCajPKNs9kbj83uI3dH1qVaDDi7w638A3QEpiS2NFvajBeWniu9 nCwk68xshk65wucpxDThQatIz6yKdXLYd6jjy+ZHd4cH1PBEuoPmxzS84lcHRZw1G7pE eZvZpppLuReavh3h6MdC9emKBSjsgW6kJyd/eD3kXGauXBcLPmefGRVvDWeiv3NJoM9p cP5q9LQM78EXxqfSDGMAu7tpGa/fZihljW18EuiXnFfins2or4vhP1+1ftkIWwVB1/sa SQLaFbSa2z2pXotC8hFXfckrO+JcgshVGt3JtjIQgKWC9JwF79XhLk9VahmyE6ZIAJ6/ LQUg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=iqkP2QCm/psQNIZdrH0gsPgyyvakV4TbORJxmarwLXQ=; b=O5nLRQvaLSNgzivtiNFYZBgEe/oXFjahr6wk2JEO8WbLzQ8Djf/c6iJ0gTDj8tos78 3xlAop7SdfdCiIhCvdxeUWE+7iJDLWraGP6zZovlM552mGczvw8fZQK2f1pMTzPGeEzQ pcFdaR6qy0OnfJ8InbiFmEAQjRNQtzSB9OVATNhjn8GfCqvd0NQUupEtl/ShCnaCsR37 EwACCwvXhLV/iTOqRxZrfN1uMy1i9972UikWyHSuwVK9XijVN6v/xa97a/N+WW/ALN16 5uqYce7jepVe/b1kwCw5q++hFnE/Q6VZeMxnEsjnrbuH25NWIDlK1z7tVqQwVUME/7qt 2zdw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@amarulasolutions.com header.s=google header.b=BvoRPQmf; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u17si10314986pfi.7.2019.02.11.06.24.46; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:25:03 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@amarulasolutions.com header.s=google header.b=BvoRPQmf; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727383AbfBKOIL (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 11 Feb 2019 09:08:11 -0500 Received: from mail-it1-f193.google.com ([209.85.166.193]:40642 "EHLO mail-it1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727140AbfBKOIL (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Feb 2019 09:08:11 -0500 Received: by mail-it1-f193.google.com with SMTP id i2so2379324ite.5 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:08:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amarulasolutions.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iqkP2QCm/psQNIZdrH0gsPgyyvakV4TbORJxmarwLXQ=; b=BvoRPQmfcCldhXT1HPptWPBvyp6OOoKlzKzi+6I8DbaaJeCK85fQmusCKcgfKt5CE6 NC9v/UrCR2DgNett5a3hty9LgzK3qLVW70fGraC5UJ2lh29dVsNkI+Vakh5W2ylyaI6I BH68eUtocGZeELOq0LAnwgprL6s5qrLAzwCkc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iqkP2QCm/psQNIZdrH0gsPgyyvakV4TbORJxmarwLXQ=; b=sGGZBqpM1YDhLEsxngmEI3onMN9wI10FEcmjBAHNfYvtomBRmGYD5WAJBxGEY52aHB ihXxqybw599/LenPmtUuAXQrP+8omCr0MrGov0uMfT1B/qGtSZkTxywgHa3gV1rzaTNb OTZISfLTE9WNvzdEA7F59iz3cQNqNmCuqLn6sp17KklqdwzCyA+3LXrPwylRHf1yx9sC w/LFx4GonIbxmwGr8V0iMOROTbR5jfFjBWubqUN4n5myth1eM8/urj0yPqWAjgTU9qEP uU1Zvb03Rm1xqZYo777ATmDi/Ih8gqw6FPgFjVI8kZ35JRTMGur1cHmejlJ3wJvWMdw9 E6cw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuY8Zxlm4cQJ6Y6IsALSb9XbC/nNmwKKSdz8MvZUjCllB+CWn6FZ tP/yY+mGewWLu7Tw506BV/LD3nlzJXNjzcWLpLRijw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:10cb:: with SMTP id 194mr6336896ity.173.1549894089414; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 06:08:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190124195900.22620-1-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> <20190124195900.22620-12-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> <20190125212433.ni2jg3wvpyjazlxf@flea> <20190129151348.mh27btttsqcmeban@flea> <20190201143102.rcvrxstc365mezvx@flea> In-Reply-To: <20190201143102.rcvrxstc365mezvx@flea> From: Jagan Teki Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 19:37:57 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 11/22] clk: sunxi-ng: a64: Add minimum rate for PLL_MIPI To: Maxime Ripard Cc: David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Chen-Yu Tsai , Michael Turquette , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel , linux-clk , dri-devel , devicetree , Michael Trimarchi , linux-amarula@amarulasolutions.com, linux-sunxi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Maxime, On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 8:01 PM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:01:31PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:43 PM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 03:06:10PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 2:54 AM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 01:28:49AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > > > > > Minimum PLL used for MIPI is 500MHz, as per manual, but > > > > > > lowering the min rate by 300MHz can result proper working > > > > > > nkms divider with the help of desired dclock rate from > > > > > > panel driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd > > > > > > > > > > Going 200MHz below the minimum doesn't seem really reasonable. What > > > > > is the issue that you are trying to fix here? > > > > > > > > > > It looks like it's picking bad dividers, but if that's the case, this > > > > > isn't the proper fix. > > > > > > > > As I stated in earlier patches, the whole idea is pick the desired > > > > dclk divider based dclk rate. So the dotclock, sun4i_dclk_round_rate > > > > is unable to get the proper dclk divider at the end, so it eventually > > > > picking up wrong divider value and fired vblank timeout. > > > > > > > > So, we come-up with optimal and working min_rate 300MHz in pll-mipi to > > > > get the desired clock something like below. > > > > [ 2.415773] [drm] No driver support for vblank timestamp query. > > > > [ 2.424116] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: min_div = 4 max_div = 127, rate = 55000000 > > > > [ 2.424172] ideal = 220000000, rounded = 0 > > > > [ 2.424176] ideal = 275000000, rounded = 0 > > > > [ 2.424194] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424197] ideal = 330000000, rounded = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424201] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: div = 6 rate = 55000000 > > > > [ 2.424205] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: min_div = 4 max_div = 127, rate = 55000000 > > > > [ 2.424209] ideal = 220000000, rounded = 0 > > > > [ 2.424213] ideal = 275000000, rounded = 0 > > > > [ 2.424230] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424233] ideal = 330000000, rounded = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424236] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: div = 6 rate = 55000000 > > > > [ 2.424253] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424270] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424278] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 1, rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424281] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 1, rate = 330000000 > > > > [ 2.424306] ccu_nkm_set_rate: rate = 330000000, parent_rate = 297000000 > > > > [ 2.424309] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.n = 5 > > > > [ 2.424311] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.k = 2 > > > > [ 2.424313] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.m = 9 > > > > [ 2.424661] sun4i_dclk_set_rate div 6 > > > > [ 2.424668] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 6, rate = 55000000 > > > > > > > > But look like this wouldn't valid for all other dclock rates, say BPI > > > > panel has 30MHz clock that would failed with this logic. > > > > > > > > On the other side Allwinner BSP calculating dclk divider based on the > > > > SoC's. for A33 [1] it is fixed dclk divider of 4 and for A64 is is > > > > calculated based on the bpp/lanes. > > > > > > It looks like the A64 has the same divider of 4: > > > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/lowlevel_sun50iw1/de_dsi.c#L12 > > > > > > I think you're confusing it with the ratio between the pixel clock and > > > the dotclock, called dsi_div: > > > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/lowlevel_sun50iw1/disp_al.c#L198 > > > > Ahh.. I thought this initially but as far as DSI clock computation is > > concern, the L12 tcon_div is local variable which is used for edge0 > > computation in burst mode and not for the dsi clock computation. Since > > the BSP is unable to get the tcon_div during edge0 computation, they > > defined it locally I think. > > > > You can see the lcd_clk_config() code [2], where we can see DSI clock > > computation using dsi_div value. > > > > Here is dump after the in Line 792 which is after computation[3] > > [ 10.800737] lcd_clk_config: dsi_div = 6, tcon_div = 4, lcd_div = 1 > > [ 10.800743] lcd_clk_config: lcd_dclk_freq = 55, dclk_rate = 55000000 > > [ 10.800749] lcd_clk_config: lcd_rate = 330000000, pll_rate = 330000000 > > > > The above dump the lcd_rate 330MHz is computed with panel clock, 55MHz > > into dsi_div 6. So this can be our actual divider values dclk_min_div, > > dclk_max_div in sun4i_dclk_round_rate (from > > drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_dotclock.c) > > I wish it was in your commit log in the first place, instead of having > to exchange multiple mails over this. > > However, I don't think that's quite true, and it might be a bug in > Allwinner's implementation (or rather something quite confusing). > > You're right that the lcd_rate and pll_rate seem to be generated from > the pixel clock, and it indeed looks like the ratio between the pixel > clock and the TCON dotclock is defined through the number of bits per > lanes. > > However, in this case, dsi_rate is actually the same than lcd_rate, > since pll_rate is going to be divided by dsi_div: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L791 > > Since lcd_div is 1, it also means that in this case, dsi_rate == > dclk_rate. > > The DSI module clock however, is always set to 148.5 MHz. Indeed, if > we look at: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L804 > > We can see that the rate in clk_info is used if it's different than > 0. This is filled by disp_al_lcd_get_clk_info, which, in the case of a > DSI panel, will hardcode it to 148.5 MHz: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/lowlevel_sun50iw1/disp_al.c#L164 > > So, the DSI clock is set to this here: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L805 > > The TCON *module* clock (the one in the clock controller) has been set > to lcd_rate (so the pixel clock times the number of bits per lane) here: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L800 > > And the PLL has been set to the same rate here: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L794 > > Let's take a step back now: that function we were looking at, > lcd_clk_config, is called by lcd_clk_enable, which is in turn called > by disp_lcd_enable here: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/disp_lcd.c#L1328 > > The next function being called is disp_al_lcd_cfg, and that function > will hardcode the TCON dotclock divider to 4, here: > https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M64-bsp/blob/master/linux-sunxi/drivers/video/sunxi/disp2/disp/de/lowlevel_sun50iw1/disp_al.c#L240 > > So, in the end, the dotclock divider is always 4, the DSI module clock > is set to 148.5 MHz, and the TCON module clock is set to 330MHz. Since > the TCON module clock doesn't have a divider, the PLL is set at that > same value but this is redundant. > > I'll experiment with this and try to see how it works on the A33. How is it with A33?