Re: [PATCH 58/89] drm/i915/skl: Register definitions for SKL Clocks

Paulo Zanoni
2014-09-22T18:17:07Z

2014-09-04 8:27 GMT-03:00 Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>:
> From: Satheeshakrishna M <satheeshakrishna.m@intel.com>
>
> This patch defines the necessary SKL registers for implementing the
> new clocking mechanism.
>
> v2: Addressed review comments by Damien
> - Added code comment
> - Introduced enum for WRPLL values
>
> v3: Rebase on top of nightly (minor conflict in i915_reg.h)
>
> v4: Use 0x, not 0X (Ville)

Bikeshed: One of my worries with this patch is that names like
CDCLK_CTL and DPLL_CTRL1 are too generic. Basically every platform has
a CDCLK and DPLLs... Maybe adding _SKL in their names would help a
little. Or maybe we don't need it, since the functions using these
defines will already be surrounded by IS_SKL+ checks...

>
> Signed-off-by: Satheeshakrishna M <satheeshakrishna.m@intel.com> (v2)
> Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com> (v3,v4)
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> index 417075d..2364ece 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
> @@ -6336,6 +6336,90 @@ enum punit_power_well {
> #define LCPLL_CD_SOURCE_FCLK (1<<21)
> #define LCPLL_CD_SOURCE_FCLK_DONE (1<<19)
>
> +/*
> + * SKL Clocks
> + */
> +
> +/* CDCLK_CTL */
> +#define CDCLK_CTL 0x46000
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_SEL_MASK (3<<26)
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_450_432 (0<<26)
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_540 (1<<26)
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_337_308 (2<<26)
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_675_617 (3<<26)
> +#define CDCLK_FREQ_DECIMAL_MASK (0x7ff)

<ocd> Please replace the tab for a space on the line above. </ocd>

> +
> +/* LCPLL_CTL */
> +#define LCPLL1_CTL 0x46010
> +#define LCPLL2_CTL 0x46014
> +#define LCPLL_PLL_ENABLE (1<<31)
> +
> +/* DPLL control1 */
> +#define DPLL_CTRL1 0x6C058
> +#define DPLL_CTRL1_HDMI_MODE(id) (1<<((id)*6+5))
> +#define DPLL_CTRL1_SSC(id) (1<<((id)*6+4))
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_MASK(id) (7<<((id)*6+1))
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE(linkrate, id) ((linkrate)<<((id)*6+1))
> +#define DPLL_CTRL1_OVERRIDE(id) (1<<((id)*6))
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_2700 0
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_1350 1
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_810 2
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_1620 3
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_1080 4
> +#define DPLL_CRTL1_LINK_RATE_2160 5
> +
> +/* DPLL control2 */
> +#define DPLL_CTRL2 0x6C05C
> +#define DPLL_CTRL2_DDI_CLK_OFF(port) (1<<(port+15))
> +#define DPLL_CTRL2_DDI_CLK_SEL_MASK(port) (3<<((port)*3+1))
> +#define DPLL_CTRL2_DDI_CLK_SEL(clk, port) (clk<<((port)*3+1))
> +#define DPLL_CTRL2_DDI_SEL_OVERRIDE(port) (1<<(port*3))
> +
> +/* DPLL Status */
> +#define DPLL_STATUS 0x6C060
> +#define DPLL_LOCK(id) (1<<((id)*8))

Bad tab here too.

> +
> +/* DPLL cfg */
> +#define DPLL1_CFGCR1 0x6C040
> +#define DPLL2_CFGCR1 0x6C048
> +#define DPLL3_CFGCR1 0x6C050
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR1_FREQ_ENABLE (1<<31)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR1_DCO_FRACTION_MASK (0x7fff<<9)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR1_DCO_FRACTION(x) (x<<9)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR1_DCO_INTEGER_MASK (0x1ff)
> +
> +#define DPLL1_CFGCR2 0x6C044
> +#define DPLL2_CFGCR2 0x6C04C
> +#define DPLL3_CFGCR2 0x6C054
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_QDIV_RATIO_MASK (0xff<<8)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_QDIV_RATIO(x) (x<<8)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_QDIV_MODE(x) (x<<7)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_KDIV_MASK (3<<5)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_KDIV(x) (x<<5)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_PDIV_MASK (7<<2)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_PDIV(x) (x<<2)
> +#define DPLL_CFGCR2_CENTRAL_FREQ_MASK (3)
> +
> +enum central_freq {
> + freq_9600 = 0,
> + freq_9000 = 1,
> + freq_8400 = 3,
> +};
> +
> +enum pdiv {
> + pdiv_1 = 0,
> + pdiv_2 = 1,
> + pdiv_3 = 2,
> + pdiv_7 = 4,
> +};
> +
> +enum kdiv {
> + kdiv_5 = 0,
> + kdiv_2 = 1,
> + kdiv_3 = 2,
> + kdiv_1 = 3,
> +};
> +

I find it weird that we're using enums here. We don't have the
tradition to do this, so it's a deviation from the usual coding style.

With or without changes:
Reviewed-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>

> /* Please see hsw_read_dcomp() and hsw_write_dcomp() before using this register,
> * since on HSW we can't write to it using I915_WRITE. */
> #define D_COMP_HSW (MCHBAR_MIRROR_BASE_SNB + 0x5F0C)
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

--
Paulo Zanoni