From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C27CE1B808; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 11:47:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750679242; cv=none; b=gFsHZbo87gpYDeOqiLihE0mRBiVGTXEvNrJyrQ+gnJa5Mzqqw4n4Olx5ojFF8DwSNhU8xR6KtVm4d5Y/I7Gocpf+JFVZh7odGg5IQtlzbD+7iXodpJrDdVC/wNkRMxTE90Jzt9ILK33FqgtOavjBVNE/OBR6+inqG0imp6m9R20= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750679242; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oHIQGmhVZk1bws7ooyBVG45/Q0gIQsMf18p3cWsR55Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Sl9JllWsHUkbXKEKCS6wietsHBjByi3ldQ8GxlfGO01YpFlKJ8aks6xrB8HVlGlhk/3Ye3QG5GOn5f+LJ8WPenOrRnYmBR/woLVY3v08DT0+vf0VSclxeTzUn+c4cRtwzR/Raiqwwnc22oxP14Qa0/5daXnpqgOlcayvsF69nPg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=bnO4gPuN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="bnO4gPuN" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (81-175-209-231.bb.dnainternet.fi [81.175.209.231]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id B07C2198D; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 13:47:01 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1750679221; bh=oHIQGmhVZk1bws7ooyBVG45/Q0gIQsMf18p3cWsR55Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bnO4gPuNBRCiyLmakXSRcFDiwdhL4FGmCD3/CF2YxwUjHyDOFd/uaOn5dYBqvaFTk bzzZyvDeqxO0ftEUIKTgViC3lylvEzfyf+XTjhROhYB+inUyHKlSjJaZaIWRtIYTZy OdjH/PzrwzCKQ3lHlwC11awVPI0dYDESYbEHllww= Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:46:58 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado Cc: =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOp?= Apitzsch , Sakari Ailus , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Shawn Guo , Sascha Hauer , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Fabio Estevam , ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht, phone-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Ricardo Ribalda Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 3/5] media: i2c: imx214: Make use of CCS PLL calculator Message-ID: <20250623114658.GB32376@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20250621-imx214_ccs_pll-v4-0-12178e5eb989@apitzsch.eu> <20250621-imx214_ccs_pll-v4-3-12178e5eb989@apitzsch.eu> <20250621181751.GA9125@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20250622171320.GA826@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Hi Ricardo, On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 11:31:17AM +0200, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote: > On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 7:13 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 05:34:56PM +0200, André Apitzsch wrote: > > > Am Samstag, dem 21.06.2025 um 21:17 +0300 schrieb Laurent Pinchart: > > > > On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 11:37:27AM +0200, André Apitzsch via B4 Relay wrote: > > > > > From: André Apitzsch > > > > > > > > > > Calculate PLL parameters based on clock frequency and link > > > > > frequency. > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Ricardo Ribalda > > > > > Signed-off-by: André Apitzsch > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig | 1 + > > > > > drivers/media/i2c/imx214.c | 213 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > > 2 files changed, 175 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > > > > > index > > > > > e68202954a8fd4711d108cf295d5771246fbc406..08db8abeea218080b0bf5bfe6 > > > > > cf82f1c0b100c4a 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > > > > > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig > > > > > [..] > > > > > @@ -1224,42 +1336,52 @@ static int imx214_parse_fwnode(struct > > > > > device *dev) > > > > > if (!endpoint) > > > > > return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, "endpoint node not found\n"); > > > > > > > > > > - ret = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse(endpoint, &bus_cfg); > > > > > + bus_cfg->bus_type = V4L2_MBUS_CSI2_DPHY; > > > > > + ret = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse(endpoint, bus_cfg); > > > > > + fwnode_handle_put(endpoint); > > > > > > > > ... drop this. Up to you. > > > > > > > > > if (ret) { > > > > > dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "parsing endpoint node failed\n"); > > > > > - goto done; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > > > > > You can return ret here. > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > /* Check the number of MIPI CSI2 data lanes */ > > > > > - if (bus_cfg.bus.mipi_csi2.num_data_lanes != 4) { > > > > > + if (bus_cfg->bus.mipi_csi2.num_data_lanes != 4) { > > > > > ret = dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, > > > > > "only 4 data lanes are currently supported\n"); > > > > > - goto done; > > > > > + goto error; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > - if (bus_cfg.nr_of_link_frequencies != 1) > > > > > + if (bus_cfg->nr_of_link_frequencies != 1) > > > > > dev_warn(dev, "Only one link-frequency supported, please review > > > > > your DT. Continuing anyway\n"); > > > > > > > > Now that the driver can calculate PLL parameters dynamically, it > > > > would be nice to lift this restriction and make the link frequency > > > > control writable, in a separate patch on top of this series. > > > > > > Maybe this could be postponed, as I don't have any use for it at the > > > moment and I don't want to further delay this series. > > > > When I said "on top", I didn't mean in a new version of this series. We > > can merge this first, and then lift this restriction. I don't have an > > imx214-based device so I can't do it myself and test it :-/ > > > > > > > - for (i = 0; i < bus_cfg.nr_of_link_frequencies; i++) { > > > > > - if (bus_cfg.link_frequencies[i] == IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ) > > > > > + for (i = 0; i < bus_cfg->nr_of_link_frequencies; i++) { > > > > > + u64 freq = bus_cfg->link_frequencies[i]; > > > > > + struct ccs_pll pll; > > > > > + > > > > > + if (!imx214_pll_calculate(imx214, &pll, freq)) > > > > > break; > > > > > - if (bus_cfg.link_frequencies[i] == > > > > > - IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY) { > > > > > + if (freq == IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY) { > > > > > dev_warn(dev, > > > > > "link-frequencies %d not supported, please review your DT. > > > > > Continuing anyway\n", > > > > > IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ); > > > > > + freq = IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ; > > > > > + if (imx214_pll_calculate(imx214, &pll, freq)) > > > > > + continue; > > > > > + bus_cfg->link_frequencies[i] = freq; > > > > > break; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > How about separating the IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY check from > > > > the PLL calculation ? Something like > > > > > > > > u64 freq = bus_cfg->link_frequencies[i]; > > > > struct ccs_pll pll; > > > > > > > > if (freq == IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY) { > > > > dev_warn(dev, > > > > "link-frequencies %d not supported, please review your DT. > > > > Continuing anyway\n", > > > > IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ); > > > > freq = IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ; > > > > bus_cfg->link_frequencies[i] = freq; > > > > } > > > > > > With PLL calculation, 480000000 (=IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY) > > > might be a valid link frequency explicitly set by the user. I'm not > > > sure whether it is a good idea to overwrite the link frequency, before > > > trying the PLL calculation. That's why I would keep the code the way it > > > is. > > > > The current code accepts both IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ (600 MHz) and > > IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ_LEGACY (400 MHz), and programs the PLL with (as > > far as I understand) a 600 MHz clock frequency in either case. To avoid > > a change in behaviour, I think overriding the 400 MHz frequency with 600 > > MHz in this patch would be best. We could then drop that in a later > > patch, possibly by patching the clock frequency in a platform-specific > > driver instead of the imx214 driver. > > > > > > if (!imx214_pll_calculate(imx214, &pll, freq)) > > > > break; > > > > > > > > It will then become easier to drop this legacy support from the > > > > driver. What platform(s) are know to specify an incorrect link > > > > frequency ? > > > > > > I don't know. > > > > Ricardo, do you have any information about this ? > > This was for a development platform for Qualcomm, think of a pizero > like, but with a Snapdragon device. > > There was a Qtechnology product based on that platform. I asked them > if they could provide me a device for testing, but it has been > discontinued and replaced with something better. > > We can start to deprecate the clock quirk if you want. That would be great. Thanks for the confirmation. By deprecate, do you mean first printing a message for a few kernel releases, or can we just drop it in the next version of this patch ? > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > - if (i == bus_cfg.nr_of_link_frequencies) > > > > > + if (i == bus_cfg->nr_of_link_frequencies) > > > > > ret = dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, > > > > > - "link-frequencies %d not supported, please review your DT\n", > > > > > - IMX214_DEFAULT_LINK_FREQ); > > > > > + "link-frequencies %lld not supported, please review your > > > > > DT\n", > > > > > + bus_cfg->nr_of_link_frequencies ? > > > > > + bus_cfg->link_frequencies[0] : 0); > > > > > > > > > > -done: > > > > > - v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_free(&bus_cfg); > > > > > - fwnode_handle_put(endpoint); > > > > > + return 0; > > > > > + > > > > > +error: > > > > > + v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_free(&imx214->bus_cfg); > > > > > return ret; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1299,7 +1421,7 @@ static int imx214_probe(struct i2c_client > > > > > *client) > > > > > return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(imx214->regmap), > > > > > "failed to initialize CCI\n"); > > > > > > > > > > - ret = imx214_parse_fwnode(dev); > > > > > + ret = imx214_parse_fwnode(dev, imx214); > > > > > if (ret) > > > > > return ret; > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1310,7 +1432,9 @@ static int imx214_probe(struct i2c_client > > > > > *client) > > > > > * Enable power initially, to avoid warnings > > > > > * from clk_disable on power_off > > > > > */ > > > > > - imx214_power_on(imx214->dev); > > > > > + ret = imx214_power_on(imx214->dev); > > > > > + if (ret < 0) > > > > > + goto error_fwnode; > > > > > > > > This change seems to belong to a separate patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ret = imx214_identify_module(imx214); > > > > > if (ret) > > > > > @@ -1341,6 +1465,12 @@ static int imx214_probe(struct i2c_client > > > > > *client) > > > > > pm_runtime_set_active(imx214->dev); > > > > > pm_runtime_enable(imx214->dev); > > > > > > > > > > + ret = imx214_pll_update(imx214); > > > > > + if (ret < 0) { > > > > > + dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "failed to update PLL\n"); > > > > > + goto error_subdev_cleanup; > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > I would move this to imx214_ctrls_init(). > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > ret = v4l2_async_register_subdev_sensor(&imx214->sd); > > > > > if (ret < 0) { > > > > > dev_err_probe(dev, ret, > > > > > @@ -1366,6 +1496,9 @@ static int imx214_probe(struct i2c_client > > > > > *client) > > > > > error_power_off: > > > > > imx214_power_off(imx214->dev); > > > > > > > > > > +error_fwnode: > > > > > + v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_free(&imx214->bus_cfg); > > > > > + > > > > > return ret; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > @@ -1378,6 +1511,8 @@ static void imx214_remove(struct i2c_client > > > > > *client) > > > > > v4l2_subdev_cleanup(sd); > > > > > media_entity_cleanup(&imx214->sd.entity); > > > > > v4l2_ctrl_handler_free(&imx214->ctrls); > > > > > + v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_free(&imx214->bus_cfg); > > > > > + > > > > > pm_runtime_disable(&client->dev); > > > > > if (!pm_runtime_status_suspended(&client->dev)) { > > > > > imx214_power_off(imx214->dev); -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart