In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
"mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
---
drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++
2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
@@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
+ const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
const bool no_clk;
};
@@ -445,6 +446,84 @@ void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_add_comp);
+void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int reg;
+ unsigned int offset;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg,
+ mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg |= mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx];
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ } else {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg |= (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ }
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_mod);
+
+void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int sof_id;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ switch (idx) {
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI2;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI3;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI1;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF1;
+ break;
+ default:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ writel_relaxed(mtx->data->mutex_sof[sof_id],
+ mtx->regs +
+ DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg, mutex->id));
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_sof);
+
void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id)
{
@@ -485,6 +564,49 @@ void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_remove_comp);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int reg;
+ unsigned int offset;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg,
+ mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx]);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ } else {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ }
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_mod);
+
+void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ writel_relaxed(MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE,
+ mtx->regs +
+ DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg,
+ mutex->id));
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_sof);
+
void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
{
struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644
--- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
+++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
@@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap;
struct device;
struct mtk_mutex;
+enum mtk_mutex_table_index {
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */
+
+ /* MDP table index */
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0,
+
+ /* DDP table index */
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1,
+
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */
+};
+
struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev);
int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
+void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
+void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
--
2.18.0
Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { > const unsigned int *mutex_sof; > const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; > const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; > + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; Can we change this to u64 instead? With that done, Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: >> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through >> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to >> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP >> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. >> >> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", >> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is >> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" >> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. >> >> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> >> --- >> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ >> 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { >> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; >> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; >> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; >> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; > > Can we change this to u64 instead? Linux is still LP64, correct? Rob
Hi Rob, On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote: > On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: > >> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > >> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to > >> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > >> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > >> > >> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > >> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is > >> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > >> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > >> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > >> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c > >> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { > >> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; > >> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; > >> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; > >> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; > > > > Can we change this to u64 instead? > > Linux is still LP64, correct? On 64-bit platforms, yes. Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms. But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Il 15/03/22 15:50, Geert Uytterhoeven ha scritto: > Hi Rob, > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote: >> On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: >>> Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto: >>>> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through >>>> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to >>>> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP >>>> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. >>>> >>>> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof", >>>> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is >>>> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" >>>> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > >>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c >>>> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data { >>>> const unsigned int *mutex_sof; >>>> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg; >>>> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg; >>>> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod; >>> >>> Can we change this to u64 instead? >> >> Linux is still LP64, correct? > > On 64-bit platforms, yes. > > Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms. > But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt > to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values? > Exactly. I wanted this to be a hint of what's happening in the background, without using unions to describe this. Geert, thanks for immediately understanding my intention. Cheers, Angelo > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds
Hi, Moudy: On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 14:10 +0800, Moudy Ho wrote: > In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through > a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs > to > be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP > can add their own MUTEX table settings independently. > > In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", > "mtk_mutex_set_sof", > "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, > which is > expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and > "mtk_mutex_remove_comp" > pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++ > 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+) > [snip] > > diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h > @@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap; > struct device; > struct mtk_mutex; > > +enum mtk_mutex_table_index { > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */ Useless, so remove this. > + > + /* MDP table index */ > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0, > + > + /* DDP table index */ > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0, > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1, If this patch would support DDP, add all DDP index. If this patch does not support DDP, remove these. Regards, CK > + > + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */ > +}; > + > struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev); > int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id); > +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, > + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx); > +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex); > void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.