Hi Boris,
thank you for the review.
On Wed, 2019-05-29 at 13:46 +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 11:54:20 +0200
> Philipp Zabel <p.za...@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>
> > Add support for multiple register ranges with SoC specific names.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.za...@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro.h | 7 ++++++-
> > drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++------
> > 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro.h
> > b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro.h
> > index 6b90fe48bcdf..b796867808d5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro.h
> > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> >
> > #define HANTRO_MAX_CLOCKS 4
> > #define HANTRO_MAX_IRQS 3
> > +#define HANTRO_MAX_REG_RANGES 4
> >
> > #define MPEG2_MB_DIM 16
> > #define MPEG2_MB_WIDTH(w) DIV_ROUND_UP(w, MPEG2_MB_DIM)
> > @@ -63,6 +64,8 @@ struct hantro_codec_ops;
> > * @num_irqs: number of irqs in the arrays
> > * @clk_names: array of clock names
> > * @num_clocks: number of clocks in the array
> > + * @reg_names: array of register range names
> > + * @num_regs: number of register range names in the
> > array
> > */
> > struct hantro_variant {
> > unsigned int enc_offset;
> > @@ -80,6 +83,8 @@ struct hantro_variant {
> > int num_irqs;
> > const char *clk_names[HANTRO_MAX_CLOCKS];
> > int num_clocks;
> > + const char *reg_names[HANTRO_MAX_REG_RANGES];
> > + int num_regs;
Do you suggest
const char * const *reg_names;
...
> > };
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -170,7 +175,7 @@ struct hantro_dev {
> > struct platform_device *pdev;
> > struct device *dev;
> > struct clk_bulk_data clocks[HANTRO_MAX_CLOCKS];
> > - void __iomem *base;
> > + void __iomem *base[HANTRO_MAX_REG_RANGES];
>
> Same comment as for the irq stuff.
... and
void __iomem **base;
to get rid of HANTRO_MAX_REG_RANGES?
Would you like to see the same for clk_names?
> > void __iomem *enc_base;
> > void __iomem *dec_base;
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> > b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> > index f677b40bcd2d..bd02b27258e3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/hantro/hantro_drv.c
> > @@ -692,12 +692,25 @@ static int hantro_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > - res = platform_get_resource(vpu->pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > - vpu->base = devm_ioremap_resource(vpu->dev, res);
> > - if (IS_ERR(vpu->base))
> > - return PTR_ERR(vpu->base);
> > - vpu->enc_base = vpu->base + vpu->variant->enc_offset;
> > - vpu->dec_base = vpu->base + vpu->variant->dec_offset;
> > + if (vpu->variant->num_regs) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < vpu->variant->num_regs; i++) {
> > + const char *reg_name = vpu->variant->reg_names[i];
> > +
> > + res = platform_get_resource_byname(vpu->pdev,
> > + IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > + reg_name);
> > + vpu->base[i] = devm_ioremap_resource(vpu->dev, res);
> > + if (IS_ERR(vpu->base[i]))
> > + return PTR_ERR(vpu->base[i]);
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + res = platform_get_resource(vpu->pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > + vpu->base[0] = devm_ioremap_resource(vpu->dev, res);
> > + if (IS_ERR(vpu->base[0]))
> > + return PTR_ERR(vpu->base[0]);
> > + vpu->enc_base = vpu->base[0] + vpu->variant->enc_offset;
> > + vpu->dec_base = vpu->base[0] + vpu->variant->dec_offset;
>
> I see ->dec_based is assigned in ->hw_init() in patch 8, so maybe it's
> better to have the same workflow for rk variants: assign
> vpu->{dec,enc}_base in ->hw_init()
I didn't want to change this around too much, as dec_base is just needed
for the vdpu_read/write functions, and I expect we'll have to somehow
replace these anyway when adding G2 support.
Adding yet another set of register accessors for g1_read/write vs
g2_read/write isn't very convenient. Maybe it woudl be better to call
the register accessors with the base as a parameter instead of
hantro_dev.
Also the kerneldoc comment says .init() should "initialize hardware".
Should that be changed to "variant specific initialization" if the
enc/dec_base are set there?
> and set ->num_regs to 1 (plus a
> fallback to platform_get_resource() instead of
> platform_get_resource_byname() when ->reg_names[0] == NULL).
I suppose we could do that, but
static const char * const rk3288_regs[] = {
NULL
}
const struct hantro_variant rk3288_vpu_variant = {
.reg_n
ames = rk3288_regs,
.num_regs = ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_regs)
};
would look a bit strange if we were to get rid of
HANTRO_MAX_REG_RANGES...
regards
Philipp
