linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: imx-drm: screen flickering
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:32:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140129163250.GU15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201401291553.15040.marex@denx.de>

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:53:14PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Isn't it the clock polarity being inverted thing again [1]?
> 
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-
> December/215536.html
> 
> The easiest way to check this would be to try sig_cfg.clk_pol = 0
> or = 1 and see if it changes anything.

It seems that the pixel clock polarity on iMX hardware is something of
a mess.  Some hardware blocks require one polarity, others require a
different polarity.

I think what would make sense is if the various output connectors/
encoders (in other words, imx-hdmi, imx-ldb, etc supplied their
properties concerning the clock polarity to the IPU layer.

We already have something like this in place already: we have the encoder
prepare functions calling into the ipuv3-crtc layer (via imx-drm-core) to
set the interface format, vsync/hsync pins, and clock flags - all of which
get used in the CRTC's mode_set method.  Adding the clock polarity into
that path doesn't sound too difficult.

The only issue is that there's a lack of conflict management here - but
that's not a new problem with this approach - it exists with the existing
data.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: 5.8Mbps down 500kbps up.  Estimation
in database were 13.1 to 19Mbit for a good line, about 7.5+ for a bad.
Estimate before purchase was "up to 13.2Mbit".

  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-29 16:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-28  8:11 imx-drm: screen flickering Christian Gmeiner
2014-01-28  8:29 ` Christian Gmeiner
2014-01-28  8:32   ` Christian Gmeiner
2014-01-29 11:15 ` Sascha Hauer
2014-01-29 14:53   ` Marek Vasut
2014-01-29 16:32     ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2014-01-30  7:45     ` Sascha Hauer
2014-02-01 22:56       ` Marek Vasut
2014-03-24 14:53         ` Christian Gmeiner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140129163250.GU15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).