[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] miniarm-rk3288: set isp/vop qos priority level

[Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com>]

Hi Simon,

On 12/12/2016 04:27 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Nickey,
>
> On 8 December 2016 at 21:39, Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@rock-chips.com> wrote:
>> isp-camera image will be broken when enter dual screen display mode.
>> We set isp qos high to solve this problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@rock-chips.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/qos_rk3288.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>   board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c  | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>   2 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/qos_rk3288.h
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/qos_rk3288.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/qos_rk3288.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..d3d6c3e
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/qos_rk3288.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright 2016 Rockchip Inc.
>> + *
>> + * SPDX-License-Identifier:     GPL-2.0+
>> + */
>> +#ifndef _ASM_ARCH_QOS_RK3288_H
>> +#define _ASM_ARCH_QOS_RK3288_H
>> +
>> +/* cpu axi qos priority */
>> +#define CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(h, l) \
>> +       ((((h) & 3) << 2) | ((l) & 3))
> Can you instead define
>
> XXX_SHIFT   2
> XXX_MASK  (3 << XXX_SHIFT)
>
> and then use these in the .c code?
>
>> +
>> +#define CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY    0x08
>> +
>> +#define VIO0_VOP_QOS            0xffad0400
>> +#define VIO1_VOP_QOS            0xffad0000
>> +#define VIO1_ISP_R_QOS          0xffad0900
>> +#define VIO1_ISP_W0_QOS         0xffad0100
>> +#define VIO1_ISP_W1_QOS         0xffad0180
>> +
>> +#endif
>> diff --git a/board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c b/board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c
>> index 79541a3..ba0f3a3 100644
>> --- a/board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c
>> +++ b/board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c
>> @@ -5,3 +5,24 @@
>>    */
>>
>>   #include <common.h>
>> +#include <asm/io.h>
>> +#include <asm/arch/qos_rk3288.h>
>> +
>> +int rk_board_late_init(void)
>> +{
>> +       /* set isp qos to higher priority */
>> +       writel(CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(2, 2),
>> +              VIO1_ISP_R_QOS + CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY);
>> +       writel(CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(2, 2),
>> +              VIO1_ISP_W0_QOS + CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY);
>> +       writel(CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(2, 2),
>> +              VIO1_ISP_W1_QOS + CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY);
>> +
>> +       /* set vop qos to higher priority */
>> +       writel(CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(2, 2),
>> +              VIO0_VOP_QOS + CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY);
>> +       writel(CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY_LEVEL(2, 2),
>> +              VIO1_VOP_QOS + CPU_AXI_QOS_PRIORITY);
> Can you add a register struct for this in arch/arm/include/asm/arch-rockchip/ ?
>
> Also I think it would be best to put this code somewhere in
> arch/arm/mach-rockchip and call it from your late init routine.

I understand people don't like source cod in hardcode(or nearly) and out of
any framwork, but there do have some different one time init program for
different SoC or board, I think it's OK to add then in soc_init() or 
board_init()
with appropriate comment.

Back to the case here, setting the ISP NOC niu to higher priority is 
only needed
for the miniarm board for the use case in that board. It might have 
other requirement
for other board for different use cases, so it's OK to add the code in 
board file.
I think you would like to have some API function for this setting then 
different board can use it
instead of do SoC setting in board file, right?
Before other board need this blob of code, would it be more clear to put 
the code in board file?

@Nickey, I'm sure the patch V3 is not what we need. Simon's suggestion 
could be detail in this:
- add a rk3288_qos_init() in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rk3288-board.c
- call the rk3288_qos_init() in rk_board_late_init() of 
board/rockchip/miniarm_rk3288/miniarm-rk3288.c

Thanks,
- Kever
>
>> +
>> +       return 0;
>> +}
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
>
>