[v13,1/6] soc: mediatek: mutex: add common interface to accommodate multiple modules operationg MUTEX
Commit Message
In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
"mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
---
drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++
2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)
Comments
Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto:
> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
>
> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++
> 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
> const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
Can we change this to u64 instead?
With that done,
Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto:
>> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
>> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
>> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
>> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
>>
>> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
>> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
>> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
>> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++
>> 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
>> index aaf8fc1abb43..778b01ce9e8f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
>> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
>> const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
>> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
>> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
>> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
>
> Can we change this to u64 instead?
Linux is still LP64, correct?
Rob
Hi Rob,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:
> On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto:
> >> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
> >> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
> >> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
> >> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
> >>
> >> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
> >> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
> >> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
> >> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
> >> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
> >> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
> >> const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
> >> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
> >> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
> >> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
> >
> > Can we change this to u64 instead?
>
> Linux is still LP64, correct?
On 64-bit platforms, yes.
Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms.
But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt
to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Il 15/03/22 15:50, Geert Uytterhoeven ha scritto:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 3:37 PM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:
>> On 3/15/22 4:10 AM, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>> Il 15/03/22 07:10, Moudy Ho ha scritto:
>>>> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
>>>> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs to
>>>> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
>>>> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod", "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
>>>> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added, which is
>>>> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
>>>> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
>
>>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c
>>>> @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
>>>> const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
>>>> const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
>>>> const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
>>>> + const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
>>>
>>> Can we change this to u64 instead?
>>
>> Linux is still LP64, correct?
>
> On 64-bit platforms, yes.
>
> Note that this is about "long long", which is 64-bit on all Linux platforms.
> But as the table seems to be used to store 2 32-bit values, it doesn't hurt
> to be explicit and use "u64"? Or a struct with 2 "u32" values?
>
Exactly. I wanted this to be a hint of what's happening in the background,
without using unions to describe this.
Geert, thanks for immediately understanding my intention.
Cheers,
Angelo
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
Hi, Moudy:
On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 14:10 +0800, Moudy Ho wrote:
> In order to allow multiple modules to operate MUTEX hardware through
> a common interfrace, a flexible index "mtk_mutex_table_index" needs
> to
> be added to replace original component ID so that like DDP and MDP
> can add their own MUTEX table settings independently.
>
> In addition, 4 generic interface "mtk_mutex_set_mod",
> "mtk_mutex_set_sof",
> "mtk_mutex_clear_mod" and "mtk_mutex_clear_sof" have been added,
> which is
> expected to replace the "mtk_mutex_add_comp" and
> "mtk_mutex_remove_comp"
> pair originally dedicated to DDP in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Moudy Ho <moudy.ho@mediatek.com>
> ---
> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.c | 122
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h | 33 +++++++
> 2 files changed, 155 insertions(+)
>
[snip]
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
> b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
> index 6fe4ffbde290..c8355bb0e6d6 100644
> --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
> +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-mutex.h
> @@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap;
> struct device;
> struct mtk_mutex;
>
> +enum mtk_mutex_table_index {
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */
Useless, so remove this.
> +
> + /* MDP table index */
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0,
> +
> + /* DDP table index */
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0,
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1,
If this patch would support DDP, add all DDP index. If this patch does
not support DDP, remove these.
Regards,
CK
> +
> + MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */
> +};
> +
> struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev);
> int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
> +void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
> +void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
> void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
> +void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
> + enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
> +void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
> void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
@@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct mtk_mutex_data {
const unsigned int *mutex_sof;
const unsigned int mutex_mod_reg;
const unsigned int mutex_sof_reg;
+ const unsigned long long *mutex_table_mod;
const bool no_clk;
};
@@ -445,6 +446,84 @@ void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_add_comp);
+void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int reg;
+ unsigned int offset;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg,
+ mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg |= mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx];
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ } else {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg |= (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ }
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_mod);
+
+void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int sof_id;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ switch (idx) {
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI2;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DSI3;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DPI1;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF0;
+ break;
+ case MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_DP_INTF1;
+ break;
+ default:
+ sof_id = MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ writel_relaxed(mtx->data->mutex_sof[sof_id],
+ mtx->regs +
+ DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg, mutex->id));
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_set_sof);
+
void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id)
{
@@ -485,6 +564,49 @@ void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_remove_comp);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+ unsigned int reg;
+ unsigned int offset;
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ if (idx == MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE ||
+ idx >= MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX)
+ return;
+
+ if (mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] <= BIT(31)) {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD(mtx->data->mutex_mod_reg,
+ mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx]);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ } else {
+ offset = DISP_REG_MUTEX_MOD2(mutex->id);
+ reg = readl_relaxed(mtx->regs + offset);
+ reg &= ~(mtx->data->mutex_table_mod[idx] >> 32);
+ writel_relaxed(reg, mtx->regs + offset);
+ }
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_mod);
+
+void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
+{
+ struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
+ mutex[mutex->id]);
+
+ WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
+
+ writel_relaxed(MUTEX_SOF_SINGLE_MODE,
+ mtx->regs +
+ DISP_REG_MUTEX_SOF(mtx->data->mutex_sof_reg,
+ mutex->id));
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_clear_sof);
+
void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
{
struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
@@ -10,14 +10,47 @@ struct regmap;
struct device;
struct mtk_mutex;
+enum mtk_mutex_table_index {
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_NONE = 0, /* Invalid engine */
+
+ /* MDP table index */
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RDMA0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_RSZ1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_TDSHP0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WROT0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_WDMA,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_AAL0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MDP_CCORR0,
+
+ /* DDP table index */
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI2,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DSI3,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DPI1,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF0,
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_DDP_DP_INTF1,
+
+ MUTEX_TABLE_IDX_MAX /* ALWAYS keep at the end */
+};
+
struct mtk_mutex *mtk_mutex_get(struct device *dev);
int mtk_mutex_prepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_add_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
+void mtk_mutex_set_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
+void mtk_mutex_set_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_remove_comp(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
enum mtk_ddp_comp_id id);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_mod(struct mtk_mutex *mutex,
+ enum mtk_mutex_table_index idx);
+void mtk_mutex_clear_sof(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_unprepare(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_put(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);
void mtk_mutex_acquire(struct mtk_mutex *mutex);