[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On Tuesday, 12 February 2013, Inki Dae  wrote:
> Applied and will go to -next.

Thanks.

> And please post the document(in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/) for it later

Already posted (1).

(1) http://patches.linaro.org/14640/

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On Tuesday, 12 February 2013, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 Applied and will go to -next.

Thanks.

 And please post the document(in
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/) for it later

Already posted (1).

(1) http://patches.linaro.org/14640/

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 5 February 2013 15:03, Sylwester Nawrocki  wrote:
> On 02/05/2013 04:03 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> [...]
>>> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
>>> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>>>
 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip.
 If it's different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible
 string to each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>>>
>>> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>>>
>>
>> Ok, let's use the below,
>>
>> For exynos4210 SoC,
>> compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"
>
> Since S5PV210 (Exynos3110 ??) seems to have same G2D IP, I guess
> something like "samsung,s5pv210-g2d" could be used for both
> S5PV210 (S5PC110) and Exynos4210 (S5PC210, S5PV310) ?
> I'm fine with using "samsung,exynos4210-g2d" for Exynos4210 though.

Since S5PV210 is the first SoC with the g2d IP as used on exynos4210,
I am inclined to use
"samsung,s5pv210-g2d" for exynos4210. This was suggested by Kukjin Kim as well.

> For instance for tegra SoCs a conventions like "nvidia,tegra-",
> is used (e.g. "nvidia,tegra20-gr2d").
>
>> For exynos4x12 SoCs,
>> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"
>
> I'm not sure how well exynos4212 is going to be supported in the kernel.
> As Mr Park pointed out, if it is going to be nearly not existent then we
> could perhaps go with "samsung,exynos4412-g2d" for Exynos4412 and
> "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" for Exynos4212 (as needed). Anyway, I fine
> with using "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" for both. I'd like to hear Mr Kim's
> opinion on this as well though.

I will use "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" for now as it has dtsi reference,
although there is no exclusive board support based on this SoC.

>
>> For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
>> has same ip)
>> compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"
>>
>> To other guys,
>> The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
>> should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
>> opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.
>
> It looks good to me, please just see the two remarks above.
>
Ok, i will use the above string for 5250.

I will resend the patches with above changes and other comments addressed.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Joonyoung Shim]

On 02/05/2013 12:03 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
> 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat :
>> On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>>>>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>>>>> To: Inki Dae
>>>>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>>>>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>>>>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>>>> support for G2D
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>>>> How about using like below?
>>>>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>>>>> Exynos4412  */
>>>>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>>>>> for
>>>>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>>>>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
>>>> characters.
>>>>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>>>>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>>>>>
>>> Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
>>> we should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it 
>>> to exynos4210.dtsi?
>> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
>> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>>
>>> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
>>> different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
>>> each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>>
> Ok, let's use the below,
>
> For exynos4210 SoC,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"
>
> For exynos4x12 SoCs,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"
>
> For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
> has same ip)
> compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"
>
> To other guys,
> The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
> should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
> opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

I like this compatible, also we can use rule like this to HDMI of
drm/exynos.

>
> Thanks,
> Inki Dae
>
>
>>> Sorry but give me your opinions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Inki Dae
>>>
>>>
>>>> Got it. Please post it again.
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> With warm regards,
>>>>> Sachin
>>>>> --
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>> ___
>>>> dri-devel mailing list
>>>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>>
>>
>> --
>> With warm regards,
>> Sachin
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[김승우]

Hi Inki,

On 2013? 02? 05? 12:03, Inki Dae wrote:
> 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat :
>> On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>>>>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>>>>> To: Inki Dae
>>>>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>>>>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>>>>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>>>> support for G2D
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about using like below?
>>>>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>>>>> Exynos4412  */
>>>>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>>>>> for
>>>>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>>>>>
>>>>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
>>>> characters.
>>>>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>>>>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
>>> we should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it 
>>> to exynos4210.dtsi?
>>
>> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
>> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>>
>>> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
>>> different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
>>> each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>>
>> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>>
> 
> Ok, let's use the below,
> 
> For exynos4210 SoC,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"
> 
> For exynos4x12 SoCs,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"
> 
> For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
> has same ip)
> compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"
> 
> To other guys,
> The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
> should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
> opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

This seems good to me.

Best Regards,
- Seung-Woo Kim

> 
> Thanks,
> Inki Dae
> 
> 
>>>
>>> Sorry but give me your opinions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Inki Dae
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Got it. Please post it again.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> With warm regards,
>>>>> Sachin
>>>>> --
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> dri-devel mailing list
>>>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> With warm regards,
>> Sachin
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
> 

-- 
Seung-Woo Kim
Samsung Software R Center
--

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kyungmin Park]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Inki Dae  wrote:
> 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat :
>> On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>>>>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>>>>> To: Inki Dae
>>>>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>>>>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>>>>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>>>> support for G2D
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about using like below?
>>>>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>>>>> Exynos4412  */
>>>>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>>>>> for
>>>>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>>>>>
>>>>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
>>>> characters.
>>>>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>>>>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
>>> we should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it 
>>> to exynos4210.dtsi?
>>
>> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
>> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>>
>>> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
>>> different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
>>> each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>>
>> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>>
>
> Ok, let's use the below,
>
> For exynos4210 SoC,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"
>
> For exynos4x12 SoCs,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"
Even though 4212 is exist, I can't see 4212 board support at mainline.
so I prefer exynos4412-g2d instead of 4212-g2d.
>
> For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
> has same ip)
> compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"
Acked-by: Kyungmin Park 
>
> To other guys,
> The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
> should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
> opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.
>
> Thanks,
> Inki Dae
>
>
>>>
>>> Sorry but give me your opinions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Inki Dae
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Got it. Please post it again.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> With warm regards,
>>>>> Sachin
>>>>> --
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> dri-devel mailing list
>>>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> With warm regards,
>> Sachin
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat :
> On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>>>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>>>> To: Inki Dae
>>>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>>>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>>>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>>> support for G2D
>>>>
>>>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> How about using like below?
>>>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>>>> Exynos4412  */
>>>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>>>> for
>>>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>>>>
>>>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
>>> characters.
>>>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>>>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>>>>
>>
>> Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
>> should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it to 
>> exynos4210.dtsi?
>
> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>
>> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
>> different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
>> each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>
> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>

Ok, let's use the below,

For exynos4210 SoC,
compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"

For exynos4x12 SoCs,
compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"

For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
has same ip)
compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"

To other guys,
The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

Thanks,
Inki Dae


>>
>> Sorry but give me your opinions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Inki Dae
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Got it. Please post it again.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> With warm regards,
>>>> Sachin
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>>> ___
>>> dri-devel mailing list
>>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
>
>
> --
> With warm regards,
> Sachin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 02/05/2013 04:03 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
[...]
>> Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
>> comptible string will be used for this one too.
>>
>>> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. 
>>> If it's different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible
>>> string to each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
>>
>> AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).
>>
> 
> Ok, let's use the below,
> 
> For exynos4210 SoC,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-g2d"

Since S5PV210 (Exynos3110 ??) seems to have same G2D IP, I guess
something like "samsung,s5pv210-g2d" could be used for both
S5PV210 (S5PC110) and Exynos4210 (S5PC210, S5PV310) ?
I'm fine with using "samsung,exynos4210-g2d" for Exynos4210 though.

For instance for tegra SoCs a conventions like "nvidia,tegra-",
is used (e.g. "nvidia,tegra20-gr2d").

> For exynos4x12 SoCs,
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d"

I'm not sure how well exynos4212 is going to be supported in the kernel.
As Mr Park pointed out, if it is going to be nearly not existent then we
could perhaps go with "samsung,exynos4412-g2d" for Exynos4412 and
"samsung,exynos4212-g2d" for Exynos4212 (as needed). Anyway, I fine
with using "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" for both. I'd like to hear Mr Kim's
opinion on this as well though.

> For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
> has same ip)
> compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-g2d"
> 
> To other guys,
> The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
> should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
> opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

It looks good to me, please just see the two remarks above.

--
Regards,
Sylwester

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[김승우]

Hi Inki,

On 2013년 02월 05일 12:03, Inki Dae wrote:
 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org:
 On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae daei...@gmail.com wrote:




 2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:



 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.

 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


 Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
 we should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it 
 to exynos4210.dtsi?

 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
 different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
 each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).

 
 Ok, let's use the below,
 
 For exynos4210 SoC,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d
 
 For exynos4x12 SoCs,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d
 
 For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
 has same ip)
 compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d
 
 To other guys,
 The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
 should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
 opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

This seems good to me.

Best Regards,
- Seung-Woo Kim

 
 Thanks,
 Inki Dae
 
 

 Sorry but give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae



 Got it. Please post it again.


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
 

-- 
Seung-Woo Kim
Samsung Software RD Center
--

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Joonyoung Shim]

On 02/05/2013 12:03 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org:
 On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae daei...@gmail.com wrote:



 2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:


 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.
 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.

 Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
 we should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it 
 to exynos4210.dtsi?
 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
 different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
 each dtsi file to identify the ip version.
 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).

 Ok, let's use the below,

 For exynos4210 SoC,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d

 For exynos4x12 SoCs,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d

 For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
 has same ip)
 compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d

 To other guys,
 The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
 should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
 opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

I like this compatible, also we can use rule like this to HDMI of
drm/exynos.


 Thanks,
 Inki Dae


 Sorry but give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae


 Got it. Please post it again.

 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 ___
 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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 02/05/2013 04:03 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
[...]
 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. 
 If it's different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible
 string to each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).

 
 Ok, let's use the below,
 
 For exynos4210 SoC,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d

Since S5PV210 (Exynos3110 ??) seems to have same G2D IP, I guess
something like samsung,s5pv210-g2d could be used for both
S5PV210 (S5PC110) and Exynos4210 (S5PC210, S5PV310) ?
I'm fine with using samsung,exynos4210-g2d for Exynos4210 though.

For instance for tegra SoCs a conventions like nvidia,tegrachip-ip,
is used (e.g. nvidia,tegra20-gr2d).

 For exynos4x12 SoCs,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d

I'm not sure how well exynos4212 is going to be supported in the kernel.
As Mr Park pointed out, if it is going to be nearly not existent then we
could perhaps go with samsung,exynos4412-g2d for Exynos4412 and
samsung,exynos4212-g2d for Exynos4212 (as needed). Anyway, I fine
with using samsung,exynos4212-g2d for both. I'd like to hear Mr Kim's
opinion on this as well though.

 For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
 has same ip)
 compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d
 
 To other guys,
 The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
 should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
 opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

It looks good to me, please just see the two remarks above.

--
Regards,
Sylwester
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 5 February 2013 15:03, Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawro...@samsung.com wrote:
 On 02/05/2013 04:03 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
 [...]
 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip.
 If it's different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible
 string to each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).


 Ok, let's use the below,

 For exynos4210 SoC,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d

 Since S5PV210 (Exynos3110 ??) seems to have same G2D IP, I guess
 something like samsung,s5pv210-g2d could be used for both
 S5PV210 (S5PC110) and Exynos4210 (S5PC210, S5PV310) ?
 I'm fine with using samsung,exynos4210-g2d for Exynos4210 though.

Since S5PV210 is the first SoC with the g2d IP as used on exynos4210,
I am inclined to use
samsung,s5pv210-g2d for exynos4210. This was suggested by Kukjin Kim as well.

 For instance for tegra SoCs a conventions like nvidia,tegrachip-ip,
 is used (e.g. nvidia,tegra20-gr2d).

 For exynos4x12 SoCs,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d

 I'm not sure how well exynos4212 is going to be supported in the kernel.
 As Mr Park pointed out, if it is going to be nearly not existent then we
 could perhaps go with samsung,exynos4412-g2d for Exynos4412 and
 samsung,exynos4212-g2d for Exynos4212 (as needed). Anyway, I fine
 with using samsung,exynos4212-g2d for both. I'd like to hear Mr Kim's
 opinion on this as well though.

I will use samsung,exynos4212-g2d for now as it has dtsi reference,
although there is no exclusive board support based on this SoC.


 For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
 has same ip)
 compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d

 To other guys,
 The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
 should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
 opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

 It looks good to me, please just see the two remarks above.

Ok, i will use the above string for 5250.

I will resend the patches with above changes and other comments addressed.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae  wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:
>
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>>> To: Inki Dae
>>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>> support for G2D
>>>
>>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How about using like below?
>>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>>> Exynos4412  */
>>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>>> for
>>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>>>
>>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
>> characters.
>>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>>>
>
> Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
> should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it to 
> exynos4210.dtsi?

Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
comptible string will be used for this one too.

> And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
> different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
> each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).

>
> Sorry but give me your opinions.
>
> Thanks,
> Inki Dae
>
>
>>
>> Got it. Please post it again.
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> With warm regards,
>>> Sachin
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>> ___
>> dri-devel mailing list
>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org:
 On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae daei...@gmail.com wrote:




 2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:



 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.

 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


 Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
 should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it to 
 exynos4210.dtsi?

 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
 different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
 each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).


Ok, let's use the below,

For exynos4210 SoC,
compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d

For exynos4x12 SoCs,
compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d

For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
has same ip)
compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d

To other guys,
The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

Thanks,
Inki Dae



 Sorry but give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae



 Got it. Please post it again.


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kyungmin Park]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 2013/2/4 Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org:
 On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae daei...@gmail.com wrote:




 2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:



 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.

 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


 Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, 
 we should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it 
 to exynos4210.dtsi?

 Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
 comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
 different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
 each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

 AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).


 Ok, let's use the below,

 For exynos4210 SoC,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4210-g2d

 For exynos4x12 SoCs,
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d
Even though 4212 is exist, I can't see 4212 board support at mainline.
so I prefer exynos4412-g2d instead of 4212-g2d.

 For exynos5250, 5410 (In case of Exynos5440, I'm not sure that the SoC
 has same ip)
 compatible = samsung,exynos5250-g2d
Acked-by: Kyungmin Park kyungmin.p...@samsung.com

 To other guys,
 The device tree is used by not only v4l2 side but also drm side so we
 should reach an arrangement. So please give me ack if you agree to my
 opinion. Otherwise please, give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae



 Sorry but give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae



 Got it. Please post it again.


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 ___
 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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 18:28, Inki Dae daei...@gmail.com wrote:




 2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:



 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.

 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


 Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
 should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it to 
 exynos4210.dtsi?

Exynos4210 has same g2d IP (v3.0) as C110 or V210; so the same
comptible string will be used for this one too.

 And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
 different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
 each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

AFAIK, they both have the same IP (v4.1).


 Sorry but give me your opinions.

 Thanks,
 Inki Dae



 Got it. Please post it again.


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

 ___
 dri-devel mailing list
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Kukjin Kim wrote:
 
Oops, I'm re-sending due to my e-mail client problem :-(

 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
 
  On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
   On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
  
   For example,
   If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
   reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
   This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
  
   In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
   across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
   define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
   can use the version appended compatible string.
  
   However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me
 or
   to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
   option something like this.
  
   compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110,
  Exynos4210 */
   compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212,
  Exynos4412 */
  
   In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
   update the code send the revised patches.
 
  The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
  to me.
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
  S5PV210),
   Exynos4210 */
 
 If this convention will be used, I hope, the known name, S5PV210 can be
 used. Why don't you use same SoC name with using in arch/arm/?
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412
  */
 
  FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia
  IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller),
  FIMC (Camera), etc.
 
 How about MFC?
 
  This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
  from greping the device tree bindings documentation.
 
 IMO, you can grep '$ git grep  compatible.*samsung'...or IP name.
 
  As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the
  past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration
  details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens
  to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP
  has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type
  than on other one.
 
 Well, I don't think so. As you know Samsung makes many EXYNOS SoCs and
 nowadays the EXYNOS SoCs include many Samsung own IPs such as
 multimedia. And the IPs are reused on across Samsung SoCs, and I hope on
 other SoC vendor's SoC. It means Samsung is no longer just SoC vendor and
 can be called IP vendor. So let's see other IP vendors, ARM, Synopsys and so
 on. How are their IPs implemented in kernel? Why should Samsung use the
 SoC name for their IP? And why should we use old SoC name in futre? For
 example, see the s3c2410-xxx for i2c, wdt, rtc, i2s and so on. Unfortunately,
 no one didn't know Samsung should prepare some brand name or  future at
 that time...Just I don't want to undergo trial and error again. I'm still 
 saying
 why Samsung own IPs cannot be used as IP vendors' ones...
 
  I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0
 
 Hmm...I think, the name, 'EXYNOS' is not a brand name for IP...
 
  for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
  used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
  has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.
 
Thanks.

- Kukjin

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013. 2. 1. ?? 8:52 Inki Dae  ??:

> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
>> To: Inki Dae
>> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
>> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
>> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>> support for G2D
>> 
>> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>> 
>>> How about using like below?
>>>Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
>>> Exynos4412  */
>>> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
>> for
>>> exynos4212 and exynos4412.
>> 
>> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
> characters.
>> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
>> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
>> 

Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
should use "samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d" as comparible string and add it to 
exynos4210.dtsi?
And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

Sorry but give me your opinions.

Thanks,
Inki Dae


> 
> Got it. Please post it again.
> 
>> 
>> --
>> With warm regards,
>> Sachin
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

> -Original Message-
> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
> To: Inki Dae
> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
> media at vger.kernel.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
> discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; patches at linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> support for G2D
> 
> On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
> >
> > How about using like below?
> > Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
> > Exynos4412  */
> > It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is
> for
> > exynos4212 and exynos4412.
> 
> AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
characters.
> Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
> Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
> 

Got it. Please post it again.

> 
> --
> With warm regards,
> Sachin
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

> -Original Message-
> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:13 PM
> To: Sylwester Nawrocki
> Cc: Inki Dae; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-media at vger.kernel.org;
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
> patches at linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> support for G2D
> 
> >> In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
> >> update the code send the revised patches.
> >
> > The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
> > to me.
> >
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
> S5PV210),
> >  Exynos4210 */
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412
> */
> >
> Looks good to me.
> 
> Inki, Kukjin, please let us know your opinion so that we can freeze
> this. Also please suggest the SoC name for Exynos5 (5250?).
> 

How about using like below?
Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
Exynos4412  */

It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is for
exynos4212 and exynos4412.


> --
> With warm regards,
> Sachin
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae  wrote:
>
> How about using like below?
> Compatible = ""samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
> Exynos4412  */
> It looks odd to use "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" saying that this ip is for
> exynos4212 and exynos4412.

AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard characters.
Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

>> In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
>> update the code send the revised patches.
>
> The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
> to me.
>
> compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110, 
> S5PV210),
>  Exynos4210 */
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
>
Looks good to me.

Inki, Kukjin, please let us know your opinion so that we can freeze
this. Also please suggest the SoC name for Exynos5 (5250?).

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae  wrote:
>
> For example,
> If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
> reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
> This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.

In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
can use the version appended compatible string.

However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
option something like this.

compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
update the code send the revised patches.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae  wrote:
>>
>> For example,
>> If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
>> reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
>> This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
> 
> In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
> across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
> define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
> can use the version appended compatible string.
> 
> However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
> to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
> option something like this.
> 
> compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
> 
> In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
> update the code send the revised patches.

The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
to me. 

compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110, S5PV210), 
 Exynos4210 */
compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia 
IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller), 
FIMC (Camera), etc.

This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
from greping the device tree bindings documentation.

As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the 
past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration 
details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens 
to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP 
has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type 
than on other one.

I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like "samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0"
for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

Hi Kukjin,

> -Original Message-
> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kukjin Kim
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 9:15 AM
> To: 'Sylwester Nawrocki'; 'Inki Dae'
> Cc: 'Sachin Kamat'; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> support for G2D
> 
> Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> >
> > Hi Inki,
> >
> Hi Sylwester and Inki,
> 
> > On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com]
> > >> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
> > >> To: Inki Dae
> > >> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
> > >> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > >> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> > >> support for G2D
> > >>
> > >> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> > >>>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
> > >>>> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
> > >>>
> > >>> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
> > >>> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
> > >>> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
> > >>> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
> > >>> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
> > >>> others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
> > >>
> > >> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible
> > string
> > >> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still
> can
> > >
> > > I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
> version
> > > means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d".
> >
> > Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and
Exynos4210,
> > V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.
> >
> > So we could have:
> >
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
> >
> In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can
> use
> IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used
> 
> One more, how about following?
> 
> compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0"
> compatible = "samsung,g2d-4.1"
> 

I think compatible string should be considered case by case.

For example,
If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1. 

So at least shouldn't that compatible string include SoC version so that
that can be added to proper dtsi file? And I'm not sure how the ip version
should be dealt with as of now:( Really enough to know the ip version
implicitly(ie. exynos4412 string means implicitly that its g2d ip version is
v4.1 so its device driver refers to the necessary data through
of_device_id's data)?


> I think, just g2d is enough. For example, we are using it for mfc like
> following: compatible = "samsung.mfc-v6"
> 
> > or alternatively
> >
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
> >

So, IMO, I think this is better than first one.

Thanks,
Inki Dae

> Thanks.
> 
> - Kukjin
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Kukjin Kim wrote:
> 
Oops, I'm re-sending due to my e-mail client problem :-(

> Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> >
> > On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> > > On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> For example,
> > >> If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
> > >> reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
> > >> This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
> > >
> > > In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
> > > across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
> > > define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
> > > can use the version appended compatible string.
> > >
> > > However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me
> or
> > > to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
> > > option something like this.
> > >
> > > compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110,
> > Exynos4210 */
> > > compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212,
> > Exynos4412 */
> > >
> > > In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
> > > update the code send the revised patches.
> >
> > The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
> > to me.
> >
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
> > S5PV210),
> >  Exynos4210 */
> 
> If this convention will be used, I hope, the known name, S5PV210 can be
> used. Why don't you use same SoC name with using in arch/arm/?
> 
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212,
> Exynos4412
> > */
> >
> > FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia
> > IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller),
> > FIMC (Camera), etc.
> >
> How about MFC?
> 
> > This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
> > from greping the device tree bindings documentation.
> >
> IMO, you can grep '$ git grep  compatible.*samsung'...or IP name.
> 
> > As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the
> > past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration
> > details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens
> > to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP
> > has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type
> > than on other one.
> >
> Well, I don't think so. As you know Samsung makes many EXYNOS SoCs and
> nowadays the EXYNOS SoCs include many Samsung own IPs such as
> multimedia. And the IPs are reused on across Samsung SoCs, and I hope on
> other SoC vendor's SoC. It means Samsung is no longer just SoC vendor and
> can be called IP vendor. So let's see other IP vendors, ARM, Synopsys and so
> on. How are their IPs implemented in kernel? Why should Samsung use the
> SoC name for their IP? And why should we use old SoC name in futre? For
> example, see the s3c2410-xxx for i2c, wdt, rtc, i2s and so on. Unfortunately,
> no one didn't know Samsung should prepare some brand name or  future at
> that time...Just I don't want to undergo trial and error again. I'm still 
> saying
> why Samsung own IPs cannot be used as IP vendors' ones...
> 
> > I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like "samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0"
> 
> Hmm...I think, the name, 'EXYNOS' is not a brand name for IP...
> 
> > for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
> > used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
> > has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.
> 
Thanks.

- Kukjin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
> On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
> > On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae  wrote:
> >>
> >> For example,
> >> If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
> >> reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
> >> This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
> >
> > In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
> > across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
> > define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
> > can use the version appended compatible string.
> >
> > However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
> > to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
> > option something like this.
> >
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110,
> Exynos4210 */
> > compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212,
> Exynos4412 */
> >
> > In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
> > update the code send the revised patches.
> 
> The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
> to me.
> 
> compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
> S5PV210),
>  Exynos4210 */

If this convention will be used, I hope, the known name, S5PV210 can be used. 
Why don't you use same SoC name with using in arch/arm/?

> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412
> */
> 
> FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia
> IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller),
> FIMC (Camera), etc.
> 
How about MFC?

> This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
> from greping the device tree bindings documentation.
> 
IMO, you can grep '$ git grep  compatible.*samsung'...or IP name.

> As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the
> past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration
> details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens
> to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP
> has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type
> than on other one.
> 
Well, I don't think so. As you know Samsung makes many EXYNOS SoCs and  
nowadays the EXYNOS SoCs include many Samsung own IPs such as multimedia. And 
the IPs are reused on across Samsung SoCs, and I hope on other SoC vendor's 
SoC. It means Samsung is no longer just SoC vendor and can be called IP vendor. 
So let's see other IP vendors, ARM, Synopsys and so on. How are their IPs 
implemented in kernel? Why should Samsung use the SoC name for their IP? And 
why should we use old SoC name in futre? For example, see the s3c2410-xxx for 
i2c, wdt, rtc, i2s and so on. Unfortunately, no one didn't know Samsung should 
prepare some brand name or  future at that time...Just I don't want to undergo 
trial and error again. I'm still saying why Samsung own IPs cannot be used as 
IP vendors' ones...

> I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like "samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0"

Hmm...I think, the name, 'EXYNOS' is not a brand name for IP...

> for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
> used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
> has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.
> 

Thanks.

- Kukjin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

Hi Inki,

On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
>> To: Inki Dae
>> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
>> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
>> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>> support for G2D
>>
>> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
>>>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
>>>> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
>>>
>>> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
>>> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
>>> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
>>> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
>>> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
>>> others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
>>
>> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible string
>> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can
>
> I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this version
> means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d".

Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and Exynos4210,
V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.

So we could have:

compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

or alternatively

compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

I don't see a need to use an additional redundant property to identify
the device. These IPs across Exynos SoC do differ and specifying
a general property like "samsung,exynos4-g2d" for them would simply be
a violation of existing conventions.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
 On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 For example,
 If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
 reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
 This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
 
 In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
 across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
 define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
 can use the version appended compatible string.
 
 However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
 to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
 option something like this.
 
 compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
 
 In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
 update the code send the revised patches.

The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
to me. 

compatible = samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110, S5PV210), 
 Exynos4210 */
compatible = samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia 
IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller), 
FIMC (Camera), etc.

This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
from greping the device tree bindings documentation.

As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the 
past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration 
details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens 
to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP 
has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type 
than on other one.

I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0
for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 For example,
 If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
 reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
 This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.

In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
can use the version appended compatible string.

However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
option something like this.

compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
update the code send the revised patches.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

 In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
 update the code send the revised patches.

 The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
 to me.

 compatible = samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110, 
 S5PV210),
  Exynos4210 */
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

Looks good to me.

Inki, Kukjin, please let us know your opinion so that we can freeze
this. Also please suggest the SoC name for Exynos5 (5250?).

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:13 PM
 To: Sylwester Nawrocki
 Cc: Inki Dae; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org;
 dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
 patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D
 
  In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
  update the code send the revised patches.
 
  The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
  to me.
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
 S5PV210),
   Exynos4210 */
  compatible = samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412
 */
 
 Looks good to me.
 
 Inki, Kukjin, please let us know your opinion so that we can freeze
 this. Also please suggest the SoC name for Exynos5 (5250?).
 

How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
Exynos4412  */

It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is for
exynos4212 and exynos4412.


 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D
 
 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 
  How about using like below?
  Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
  Exynos4412  */
  It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
  exynos4212 and exynos4412.
 
 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
 

Got it. Please post it again.

 
 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013. 2. 1. 오후 8:52 Inki Dae inki@samsung.com 작성:

 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sachin Kamat
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 8:40 PM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki; Kukjin Kim; Sylwester Nawrocki; linux-
 me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-
 disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; patc...@linaro.org
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D
 
 On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 
 How about using like below?
Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is
 for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.
 
 AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard
 characters.
 Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
 Hence IMO 4212 is OK.
 

Oops, one more thing. AFAIK Exynos4210 also has fimg-2d ip. In this case, we 
should use samsung,exynos4210-fimg-2d as comparible string and add it to 
exynos4210.dtsi?
And please check if exynos4212 and 4412 SoCs have same fimg-2d ip. If it's 
different, we might need to add ip version property or compatible string to 
each dtsi file to identify the ip version.

Sorry but give me your opinions.

Thanks,
Inki Dae


 
 Got it. Please post it again.
 
 
 --
 With warm regards,
 Sachin
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 
 ___
 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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

On 1 February 2013 17:02, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:

 How about using like below?
 Compatible = samsung,exynos4x12-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412  */
 It looks odd to use samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d saying that this ip is for
 exynos4212 and exynos4412.

AFAIK, compatible strings are not supposed to have any wildcard characters.
Compatible string should suggest the first SoC that contained this IP.
Hence IMO 4212 is OK.


-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
 
 On 02/01/2013 09:33 AM, Sachin Kamat wrote:
  On 1 February 2013 06:57, Inki Dae inki@samsung.com wrote:
 
  For example,
  If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
  reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
  This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1.
 
  In case of Exynos4 series the base address of G2D ip is different
  across series. Hence we cannot define it in exynos4.dtsi and need to
  define the nodes in exynos4xxx.dtsi or specific board files. Thus we
  can use the version appended compatible string.
 
  However even the second option suggested by Sylwester is OK with me or
  to be even more specific we could go for both SoC as well as version
  option something like this.
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110,
 Exynos4210 */
  compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212,
 Exynos4412 */
 
  In any case please let me know the final preferred one so that I can
  update the code send the revised patches.
 
 The version with SoC name embedded in it seems most reliable and correct
 to me.
 
 compatible = samsung,exynos3110-fimg-2d /* for Exynos3110 (S5PC110,
 S5PV210),
  Exynos4210 */

If this convention will be used, I hope, the known name, S5PV210 can be used. 
Why don't you use same SoC name with using in arch/arm/?

 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-fimg-2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412
 */
 
 FIMG stands for Fully Interactive Mobile Graphics, and other multimedia
 IPs follow this naming convention, e.g. FIMG-3D, FIMD (Display Controller),
 FIMC (Camera), etc.
 
How about MFC?

 This is just my opinion though, and it seems this is a most common scheme
 from greping the device tree bindings documentation.
 
IMO, you can grep '$ git grep  compatible.*samsung'...or IP name.

 As Stephen pointed out, and I also did in some other mail thread in the
 past, not only an IP revision might be required, but also its integration
 details, specific to an SoC type are important. This actually happens
 to be the case with FIMC, where same version of one instance of the IP
 has more data interfaces routed to other SoC subsystems on one SoC type
 than on other one.
 
Well, I don't think so. As you know Samsung makes many EXYNOS SoCs and  
nowadays the EXYNOS SoCs include many Samsung own IPs such as multimedia. And 
the IPs are reused on across Samsung SoCs, and I hope on other SoC vendor's 
SoC. It means Samsung is no longer just SoC vendor and can be called IP vendor. 
So let's see other IP vendors, ARM, Synopsys and so on. How are their IPs 
implemented in kernel? Why should Samsung use the SoC name for their IP? And 
why should we use old SoC name in futre? For example, see the s3c2410-xxx for 
i2c, wdt, rtc, i2s and so on. Unfortunately, no one didn't know Samsung should 
prepare some brand name or  future at that time...Just I don't want to undergo 
trial and error again. I'm still saying why Samsung own IPs cannot be used as 
IP vendors' ones...

 I think it won't be possible to use a scheme like samsung-exynos-g2d-3.0

Hmm...I think, the name, 'EXYNOS' is not a brand name for IP...

 for all IPs. And I would much more like to see a uniform naming convention
 used, rather than living with a chaotic set of compatible properties, that
 has a potential to become even more chaotic in the future.
 

Thanks.

- Kukjin

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Stephen Warren]

On 01/31/2013 06:27 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
> Hi Kukjin,
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: linux-media-owner at vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
>> owner at vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kukjin Kim
>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 9:15 AM
>> To: 'Sylwester Nawrocki'; 'Inki Dae'
>> Cc: 'Sachin Kamat'; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
>> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
>> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>> support for G2D
>>
>> Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Inki,
>>>
>> Hi Sylwester and Inki,
>>
>>> On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
>>>>> To: Inki Dae
>>>>> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
>>>>> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
>>>>> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
>>>>> support for G2D
>>>>>
>>>>> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
>>>>>>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
>>>>>>> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
>>>>>>
>>>>>> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
>>>>>> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
>>>>>> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
>>>>>> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
>>>>>> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
>>>>>> others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
>>>>>
>>>>> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible
>>> string
>>>>> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still
>> can
>>>>
>>>> I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
>> version
>>>> means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d".
>>>
>>> Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and
> Exynos4210,
>>> V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.
>>>
>>> So we could have:
>>>
>>> compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
>>> compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
>>>
>> In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can
>> use
>> IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used
>>
>> One more, how about following?
>>
>> compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0"
>> compatible = "samsung,g2d-4.1"
>>
> 
> I think compatible string should be considered case by case.
> 
> For example,
> If compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0" is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
> reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
> This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1. 

You can always add the most common value for the compatible property
into exynos4.dtsi, and then override it in exyons4210.dtsi, or other files.

Still, the idea of including the SoC version in the compatible value is
a good idea.

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
> Hi Inki,
> 
Hi Sylwester and Inki,

> On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
> >> To: Inki Dae
> >> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
> >> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
> >> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> >> support for G2D
> >>
> >> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> >>>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
> >>>> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
> >>>
> >>> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
> >>> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
> >>> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
> >>> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
> >>> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
> >>> others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
> >>
> >> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible
> string
> >> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can
> >
> > I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
version
> > means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d".
> 
> Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and Exynos4210,
> V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> So we could have:
> 
> compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
> compatible = "samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
> 
In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can use
IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used 

One more, how about following?

compatible = "samsung,g2d-3.0"
compatible = "samsung,g2d-4.1"

I think, just g2d is enough. For example, we are using it for mfc like
following: compatible = "samsung.mfc-v6"

> or alternatively
> 
> compatible = "samsung,exynos3110-g2d" /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
> compatible = "samsung,exynos4212-g2d" /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
> 
Thanks.

- Kukjin

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

> -Original Message-
> From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
> To: Inki Dae
> Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-media at vger.kernel.org; dri-
> devel at lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org;
> patches at linaro.org; s.nawrocki at samsung.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
> support for G2D
> 
> On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> >> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
> >> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
> >
> > not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
> > driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
> > "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
> > identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
> > and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
> > others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
> 
> Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible string
> for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can

I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this version
means Exynos4 SoC then it should be "samsung,exynos4-g2d".

> match the driver with multiple different revisions of the IP and associate
> any required driver's private data with each corresponding compatible
> property.
> 

Right, and for why I prefer to use version property instead of embedded
version string, you can refer to the my comment I replied already to the
"drm/exynos: Get HDMI version from device tree" email thread.

> Perhaps it would make more sense to include the SoCs name in the
> compatible
> string, e.g. "samsung,exynos-g2d-v41", but appending revision of the IP
> seems acceptable to me. The revisions appear to be well documented and
> it's
> more or less clear which one corresponds to which SoC.
> 
> --
> 
> Thanks,
> Sylwester

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

Hi Kukjin,

 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kukjin Kim
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 9:15 AM
 To: 'Sylwester Nawrocki'; 'Inki Dae'
 Cc: 'Sachin Kamat'; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
 de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
 patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
 Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D
 
 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
 
  Hi Inki,
 
 Hi Sylwester and Inki,
 
  On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
   -Original Message-
   From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawro...@gmail.com]
   Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
   To: Inki Dae
   Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
   de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
   patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
   Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
   support for G2D
  
   On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
   +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
   +   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },
  
   not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
   driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
   samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
   identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
   and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
   others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
  
   Err no. Are you suggesting using samsung,exynos5-g2d compatible
  string
   for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still
 can
  
   I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
 version
   means Exynos4 SoC then it should be samsung,exynos4-g2d.
 
  Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and
Exynos4210,
  V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.
 
  So we could have:
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
  compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
 
 In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can
 use
 IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used
 
 One more, how about following?
 
 compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0
 compatible = samsung,g2d-4.1
 

I think compatible string should be considered case by case.

For example,
If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1. 

So at least shouldn't that compatible string include SoC version so that
that can be added to proper dtsi file? And I'm not sure how the ip version
should be dealt with as of now:( Really enough to know the ip version
implicitly(ie. exynos4412 string means implicitly that its g2d ip version is
v4.1 so its device driver refers to the necessary data through
of_device_id's data)?


 I think, just g2d is enough. For example, we are using it for mfc like
 following: compatible = samsung.mfc-v6
 
  or alternatively
 
  compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
  compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
 

So, IMO, I think this is better than first one.

Thanks,
Inki Dae

 Thanks.
 
 - Kukjin
 
 --
 To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-media in
 the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
 More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Stephen Warren]

On 01/31/2013 06:27 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
 Hi Kukjin,
 
 -Original Message-
 From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
 ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kukjin Kim
 Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 9:15 AM
 To: 'Sylwester Nawrocki'; 'Inki Dae'
 Cc: 'Sachin Kamat'; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
 de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
 patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
 Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:

 Hi Inki,

 Hi Sylwester and Inki,

 On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
 -Original Message-
 From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawro...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
 To: Inki Dae
 Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
 de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
 patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
 support for G2D

 On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
 +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
 +   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },

 not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
 driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
 samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
 identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
 and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
 others. And please add descriptions to dt document.

 Err no. Are you suggesting using samsung,exynos5-g2d compatible
 string
 for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still
 can

 I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
 version
 means Exynos4 SoC then it should be samsung,exynos4-g2d.

 Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and
 Exynos4210,
 V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.

 So we could have:

 compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
 compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

 In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can
 use
 IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used

 One more, how about following?

 compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0
 compatible = samsung,g2d-4.1

 
 I think compatible string should be considered case by case.
 
 For example,
 If compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0 is added to exynos4210.dtsi, it'd be
 reasonable. But what if that compatible string is added to exynos4.dtsi?.
 This case isn't considered for exynos4412 SoC with v4.1. 

You can always add the most common value for the compatible property
into exynos4.dtsi, and then override it in exyons4210.dtsi, or other files.

Still, the idea of including the SoC version in the compatible value is
a good idea.
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

Hi Inki,

On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:

-Original Message-
From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawro...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
To: Inki Dae
Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
support for G2D

On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:

+static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
+   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },


not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
others. And please add descriptions to dt document.


Err no. Are you suggesting using samsung,exynos5-g2d compatible string
for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can


I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this version
means Exynos4 SoC then it should be samsung,exynos4-g2d.


Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and Exynos4210,
V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.

So we could have:

compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

or alternatively

compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */

I don't see a need to use an additional redundant property to identify
the device. These IPs across Exynos SoC do differ and specifying
a general property like samsung,exynos4-g2d for them would simply be
a violation of existing conventions.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
 
 Hi Inki,
 
Hi Sylwester and Inki,

 On 01/31/2013 02:30 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
  -Original Message-
  From: Sylwester Nawrocki [mailto:sylvester.nawro...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:51 AM
  To: Inki Dae
  Cc: Sachin Kamat; linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; dri-
  de...@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org;
  patc...@linaro.org; s.nawro...@samsung.com
  Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery
  support for G2D
 
  On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
  +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
  +   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },
 
  not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
  driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
  samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
  identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
  and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
  others. And please add descriptions to dt document.
 
  Err no. Are you suggesting using samsung,exynos5-g2d compatible
 string
  for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can
 
  I assumed the version 'v41' is the ip for Exynos5 SoC. So if this
version
  means Exynos4 SoC then it should be samsung,exynos4-g2d.
 
 Yes, v3.0 is implemented in the S5PC110 (Exynos3110) SoCs and Exynos4210,
 V4.1 can be found in Exynos4212 and Exynos4412, if I'm not mistaken.
 
 So we could have:
 
 compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-3.0 /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
 compatible = samsung,exynos-g2d-4.1 /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
 
In my opinion, this is better than later. Because as I said, when we can use
IP version to identify, it is more clear and can be used 

One more, how about following?

compatible = samsung,g2d-3.0
compatible = samsung,g2d-4.1

I think, just g2d is enough. For example, we are using it for mfc like
following: compatible = samsung.mfc-v6

 or alternatively
 
 compatible = samsung,exynos3110-g2d /* for Exynos3110, Exynos4210 */
 compatible = samsung,exynos4212-g2d /* for Exynos4212, Exynos4412 */
 
Thanks.

- Kukjin

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
>> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
>> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
>
> not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
> driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
> "samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
> identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
> and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
> others. And please add descriptions to dt document.

Err no. Are you suggesting using "samsung,exynos5-g2d" compatible string
for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can
match the driver with multiple different revisions of the IP and associate
any required driver's private data with each corresponding compatible
property.

Perhaps it would make more sense to include the SoCs name in the compatible
string, e.g. "samsung,exynos-g2d-v41", but appending revision of the IP
seems acceptable to me. The revisions appear to be well documented and it's
more or less clear which one corresponds to which SoC.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013/1/25 Sachin Kamat :
> From: Ajay Kumar 
>
> This patch adds device tree match table for Exynos G2D controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar 
> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat 
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c |   10 ++
>  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
> index ddcfb5d..d24b170 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>  #include 
>  #include 
>  #include 
> +#include 
>
>  #include 
>  #include 
> @@ -1240,6 +1241,14 @@ static int g2d_resume(struct device *dev)
>
>  static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(g2d_pm_ops, g2d_suspend, g2d_resume);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
> +   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },

not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
"samsung,exynos5-g2d" instead and adding a new property 'version' to
identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
others. And please add descriptions to dt document.

> +   {},
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_g2d_match);
> +#endif
> +
>  struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
> .probe  = g2d_probe,
> .remove = g2d_remove,
> @@ -1247,5 +1256,6 @@ struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
> .name   = "s5p-g2d",
> .owner  = THIS_MODULE,
> .pm = _pm_ops,
> +   .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_g2d_match),
> },
>  };
> --
> 1.7.4.1
>
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Inki Dae]

2013/1/25 Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org:
 From: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com

 This patch adds device tree match table for Exynos G2D controller.

 Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com
 Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org
 ---
  drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c |   10 ++
  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c 
 b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
 index ddcfb5d..d24b170 100644
 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
 +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
 @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
  #include linux/workqueue.h
  #include linux/dma-mapping.h
  #include linux/dma-attrs.h
 +#include linux/of.h

  #include drm/drmP.h
  #include drm/exynos_drm.h
 @@ -1240,6 +1241,14 @@ static int g2d_resume(struct device *dev)

  static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(g2d_pm_ops, g2d_suspend, g2d_resume);

 +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
 +static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
 +   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },

not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
others. And please add descriptions to dt document.

 +   {},
 +};
 +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_g2d_match);
 +#endif
 +
  struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
 .probe  = g2d_probe,
 .remove = g2d_remove,
 @@ -1247,5 +1256,6 @@ struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
 .name   = s5p-g2d,
 .owner  = THIS_MODULE,
 .pm = g2d_pm_ops,
 +   .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_g2d_match),
 },
  };
 --
 1.7.4.1

 ___
 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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 01/30/2013 09:50 AM, Inki Dae wrote:

+static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
+   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },


not only Exynos5 and also Exyno4 has the g2d gpu and drm-based g2d
driver shoud support for all Exynos SoCs. How about using
samsung,exynos5-g2d instead and adding a new property 'version' to
identify ip version more surely? With this, we could know which SoC
and its g2d ip version. The version property could have '0x14' or
others. And please add descriptions to dt document.


Err no. Are you suggesting using samsung,exynos5-g2d compatible string
for Exynos4 specific IPs ? This would not be correct, and you still can
match the driver with multiple different revisions of the IP and associate
any required driver's private data with each corresponding compatible
property.

Perhaps it would make more sense to include the SoCs name in the compatible
string, e.g. samsung,exynos-g2d-v41, but appending revision of the IP
seems acceptable to me. The revisions appear to be well documented and it's
more or less clear which one corresponds to which SoC.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

From: Ajay Kumar 

This patch adds device tree match table for Exynos G2D controller.

Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar 
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat 
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c |   10 ++
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
index ddcfb5d..d24b170 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include 
 #include 
 #include 
+#include 

 #include 
 #include 
@@ -1240,6 +1241,14 @@ static int g2d_resume(struct device *dev)

 static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(g2d_pm_ops, g2d_suspend, g2d_resume);

+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
+   { .compatible = "samsung,g2d-v41" },
+   {},
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_g2d_match);
+#endif
+
 struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
.probe  = g2d_probe,
.remove = g2d_remove,
@@ -1247,5 +1256,6 @@ struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
.name   = "s5p-g2d",
.owner  = THIS_MODULE,
.pm = _pm_ops,
+   .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_g2d_match),
},
 };
-- 
1.7.4.1

[PATCH 2/2] drm/exynos: Add device tree based discovery support for G2D

[Sachin Kamat]

From: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com

This patch adds device tree match table for Exynos G2D controller.

Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar ajaykumar...@samsung.com
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat sachin.ka...@linaro.org
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c |   10 ++
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
index ddcfb5d..d24b170 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_g2d.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 #include linux/workqueue.h
 #include linux/dma-mapping.h
 #include linux/dma-attrs.h
+#include linux/of.h
 
 #include drm/drmP.h
 #include drm/exynos_drm.h
@@ -1240,6 +1241,14 @@ static int g2d_resume(struct device *dev)
 
 static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(g2d_pm_ops, g2d_suspend, g2d_resume);
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+static const struct of_device_id exynos_g2d_match[] = {
+   { .compatible = samsung,g2d-v41 },
+   {},
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_g2d_match);
+#endif
+
 struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
.probe  = g2d_probe,
.remove = g2d_remove,
@@ -1247,5 +1256,6 @@ struct platform_driver g2d_driver = {
.name   = s5p-g2d,
.owner  = THIS_MODULE,
.pm = g2d_pm_ops,
+   .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(exynos_g2d_match),
},
 };
-- 
1.7.4.1

___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel