lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 08/14] drm: rcar-du: Add support for CMM
Hi Laurent,

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 04:56:19PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:24:22AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 03:51:48PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > > Add a driver for the R-Car Display Unit Color Correction Module.
> > >
> > > In most of Gen3 SoCs, each DU output channel is provided with a CMM unit
> > > to perform image enhancement and color correction.
> > >
> > > Add support for CMM through a driver that supports configuration of
> > > the 1-dimensional LUT table. More advanced CMM feature will be
> > > implemented on top of this basic one.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig | 7 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Makefile | 1 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.c | 262 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.h | 38 +++++
> > > 4 files changed, 308 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.c
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.h
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig
> > > index 1529849e217e..539d232790d1 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Kconfig
> > > @@ -13,6 +13,13 @@ config DRM_RCAR_DU
> > > Choose this option if you have an R-Car chipset.
> > > If M is selected the module will be called rcar-du-drm.
> > >
> > > +config DRM_RCAR_CMM
> > > + bool "R-Car DU Color Management Module (CMM) Support"
> > > + depends on DRM && OF
> > > + depends on DRM_RCAR_DU
> > > + help
> > > + Enable support for R-Car Color Management Module (CMM).
> > > +
> > > config DRM_RCAR_DW_HDMI
> > > tristate "R-Car DU Gen3 HDMI Encoder Support"
> > > depends on DRM && OF
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Makefile
> > > index 6c2ed9c46467..4d1187ccc3e5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Makefile
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/Makefile
> > > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ rcar-du-drm-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_LVDS) += rcar_du_of.o \
> > > rcar-du-drm-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_VSP) += rcar_du_vsp.o
> > > rcar-du-drm-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_WRITEBACK) += rcar_du_writeback.o
> > >
> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_CMM) += rcar_cmm.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_DU) += rcar-du-drm.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_DW_HDMI) += rcar_dw_hdmi.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_RCAR_LVDS) += rcar_lvds.o
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..55361f5701e8
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,262 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> > > +/*
> > > + * rcar_cmm.c -- R-Car Display Unit Color Management Module
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2019 Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/io.h>
> > > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > > +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> > > +
> > > +#include <drm/drm_color_mgmt.h>
> > > +
> > > +#include "rcar_cmm.h"
> > > +
> > > +#define CM2_LUT_CTRL 0x0000
> > > +#define CM2_LUT_CTRL_LUT_EN BIT(0)
> > > +#define CM2_LUT_TBL_BASE 0x0600
> > > +#define CM2_LUT_TBL(__i) (CM2_LUT_TBL_BASE + (__i) * 4)
> > > +
> > > +struct rcar_cmm {
> > > + void __iomem *base;
> > > + bool enabled;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * @lut: 1D-LUT status
> > > + * @lut.enabled: 1D-LUT enabled flag
> > > + * @lut.size: Number of entries in the LUT table
> >
> > Please see my review of patch 13/14, I wonder if we could drop this
> > field.
> >
> > > + * @lut.table: Table of 1D-LUT entries scaled to HW support
> > > + * precision (8-bits per color component)
> > > + */
> > > + struct {
> > > + bool enabled;
> > > + unsigned int size;
> > > + u32 table[CMM_GAMMA_LUT_SIZE];
> > > + } lut;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static inline int rcar_cmm_read(struct rcar_cmm *rcmm, u32 reg)
> > > +{
> > > + return ioread32(rcmm->base + reg);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static inline void rcar_cmm_write(struct rcar_cmm *rcmm, u32 reg, u32 data)
> > > +{
> > > + iowrite32(data, rcmm->base + reg);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * rcar_cmm_lut_extract() - Scale down to hw precision the DRM LUT table
> >
> > s/hw/hardware/ (and below too)
> >
> > > + * entries and store them.
> > > + * @rcmm: Pointer to the CMM device
> > > + * @size: Number of entries in the table
> > > + * @drm_lut: DRM LUT table
> > > + */
> > > +static void rcar_cmm_lut_extract(struct rcar_cmm *rcmm, size_t size,
> > > + const struct drm_color_lut *drm_lut)
> > > +{
> > > + unsigned int i;
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
> > > + const struct drm_color_lut *lut = &drm_lut[i];
> > > +
> > > + rcmm->lut.table[i] = drm_color_lut_extract(lut->red, 8) << 16
> > > + | drm_color_lut_extract(lut->green, 8) << 8
> > > + | drm_color_lut_extract(lut->blue, 8);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + rcmm->lut.size = size;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * rcar_cmm_lut_load() - Write to hw the LUT table entries from the local table.
> > > + *
> >
> > No need for a blank line
> >
> > > + * @rcmm: Pointer to the CMM device
> > > + */
> > > +static void rcar_cmm_lut_load(struct rcar_cmm *rcmm)
> >
> > I would name this rcar_cmm_lut_write().
>
> I won't, as I would like to convey the LUT tables is loaded from the
> local cache after it has been scaled down to the hardware supported
> precision.

"load" hints a read though, and here you write the LUT to the hardware.
Without reading the comments I would have thought this function would
read the LUT back from the hardware.

> > > +{
> > > + unsigned int i;
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 0; i < rcmm->lut.size; ++i) {
> > > + u32 entry = rcmm->lut.table[i];
> > > +
> > > + rcar_cmm_write(rcmm, CM2_LUT_TBL(i), entry);
> >
> > You don't need the local entry variable.
>
> True, but the code is nicer to read and the compiler should be smart
> enough to optimize it away

I'm not sure about nicer to read, I find the opposite personally, but
it's your code :-)

> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * rcar_cmm_setup() - configure the CMM unit
> >
> > s/configure/Configure/ and s/$/./, or the other way around for the other
> > functions (I don't mine which one, but let's stay consistent).
>
> Oh right, sorry for the confusion

It's just my OCD kicking in :-)

> > > + *
> >
> > No need for a blank line (same for the functions below).
> >
> > > + * @pdev: The platform device associated with the CMM instance
> > > + * @config: The CRTC-provided configuration.
> > > + *
> > > + * Configure the CMM unit with the CRTC-provided configuration.
> > > + * Currently enabling, disabling and programming of the 1-D LUT unit is
> > > + * supported.
> > > + */
> > > +int rcar_cmm_setup(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > > + const struct rcar_cmm_config *config)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rcar_cmm *rcmm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > +
> > > + if (config->lut.size > CMM_GAMMA_LUT_SIZE)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * As rcar_cmm_setup() is called by atomic commit tail helper, it might
> > > + * be called when the CMM is disabled. As we can't program the hardware
> > > + * in that case, store the configuration internally and apply it when
> > > + * the CMM will be enabled by the CRTC through rcar_cmm_enable().
> > > + */
> > > + if (!rcmm->enabled) {
> > > + if (!config->lut.enable)
> > > + return 0;
> > > +
> > > + rcar_cmm_lut_extract(rcmm, config->lut.size, config->lut.table);
> > > + rcmm->lut.enabled = true;
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /* Stop LUT operations if requested. */
> > > + if (!config->lut.enable) {
> > > + if (rcmm->lut.enabled) {
> > > + rcar_cmm_write(rcmm, CM2_LUT_CTRL, 0);
> > > + rcmm->lut.enabled = false;
> > > + rcmm->lut.size = 0;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Enable LUT and program the new gamma table values.
> > > + *
> > > + * FIXME: In order to have stable operations it is required to first
> > > + * enable the 1D-LUT and then program its table entries. This seems to
> > > + * contradict what the chip manual reports, and will have to be
> > > + * reconsidered when implementing support for double buffering.
> > > + */
> > > + if (!rcmm->lut.enabled) {
> > > + rcar_cmm_write(rcmm, CM2_LUT_CTRL, CM2_LUT_CTRL_LUT_EN);
> > > + rcmm->lut.enabled = true;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + rcar_cmm_lut_extract(rcmm, config->lut.size, config->lut.table);
> > > + rcar_cmm_lut_load(rcmm);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcar_cmm_setup);
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * rcar_cmm_enable() - enable the CMM unit
> > > + *
> > > + * @pdev: The platform device associated with the CMM instance
> > > + *
> > > + * Enable the CMM unit by enabling the parent clock and enabling the CMM
> > > + * components, such as 1-D LUT, if requested.
> > > + */
> > > +int rcar_cmm_enable(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rcar_cmm *rcmm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + if (!rcmm)
> > > + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> > This function is called in rcar_du_crtc_atomic_enable(), so that's not
> > the right error code. It seems we need another function for the CMM API
> > to defer probing :-/ I would call it rcar_cmm_init(). This check would
> > then be removed.
>
> I agree about the return code, but not the name, as this function
> actually enables the CMM.

I meant creating a new rcar_cmm_init() function that would just have the
!rcmm check.

> PROBE_DEFER does not make any sense here, I
> wonder where it come from, as the probing of CMM and DU has long
> happened once we get here (at least, I assume so, if we receive a
> gamma_table, userspace has already been running, and both DU and CMM
> should have probed. Otherwise, we can exploit the newly created device
> link, and make sure DU probes after the CMM).
>
> I would just change the return value here, and possibly use the device
> link to ensure the correct probing sequence.

How does device link help here ?

> > > +
> > > + ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
> > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + /* Apply the LUT table values saved at rcar_cmm_setup() time. */
> > > + if (rcmm->lut.enabled) {
> > > + rcar_cmm_write(rcmm, CM2_LUT_CTRL, CM2_LUT_CTRL_LUT_EN);
> > > + rcar_cmm_lut_load(rcmm);
> >
> > You will not like this, but I just realised that we're now reprogramming
> > the LUT contents every time the CMM is enabled. Do you think that's
> > something we should optimise ? And yes, that would require introducing
>
> Why so? If we receive an enable after a disable which stops the CMM
> clock and we have no guarantees the table entries have been kept, or
> what we receive from userspace has changed or not. Why is this an
> issue in your opinion?

I thought the hardware preserved the LUT ? Skipping the LUT write is an
optimisation, so we could do without it in the initial version. I think
it would become more important with the CLU though, as we'll have more
data entries there. Maybe we should first check how much time the LUT
and CLU writes take before deciding to optimise them.

> > back an update flag in rcmm->lut :-S Sorry for not realising this when I
> > proposed dropping it.
> >
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + rcmm->enabled = true;
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcar_cmm_enable);
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * rcar_cmm_disable() - disable the CMM unit
> > > + *
> > > + * @pdev: The platform device associated with the CMM instance
> > > + *
> > > + * Disable the CMM unit by stopping the parent clock.
> > > + */
> > > +void rcar_cmm_disable(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rcar_cmm *rcmm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > +
> > > + rcar_cmm_write(rcmm, CM2_LUT_CTRL, 0);
> > > +
> > > + pm_runtime_put(&pdev->dev);
> > > +
> > > + rcmm->lut.enabled = false;
> > > + rcmm->lut.size = 0;
> > > +
> > > + rcmm->enabled = false;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcar_cmm_disable);
> > > +
> > > +static int rcar_cmm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rcar_cmm *rcmm;
> > > + struct resource *res;
> > > +
> > > + rcmm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*rcmm), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!rcmm)
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, rcmm);
> > > +
> > > + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > > + rcmm->base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(rcmm->base))
> > > + return PTR_ERR(rcmm->base);
> >
> > You really don't like combining those two calls, do you ? :-)
>
> devm_of_iomap() ?

devm_platform_ioremap_resource()

> > > +
> > > + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int rcar_cmm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static const struct of_device_id rcar_cmm_of_table[] = {
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,cmm-r8a7795", },
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,cmm-r8a7796", },
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,cmm-r8a77965", },
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,cmm-r8a77990", },
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,cmm-r8a77995", },
> >
> > As Geert pointed out, I would drop those entries.
>
> yes
>
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen3-cmm", },
> > > + { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen2-cmm", },
> > > + { },
> > > +};
> > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rcar_cmm_of_table);
> > > +
> > > +static struct platform_driver rcar_cmm_platform_driver = {
> > > + .probe = rcar_cmm_probe,
> > > + .remove = rcar_cmm_remove,
> > > + .driver = {
> > > + .name = "rcar-cmm",
> > > + .of_match_table = rcar_cmm_of_table,
> > > + },
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +module_platform_driver(rcar_cmm_platform_driver);
> > > +
> > > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>");
> > > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Renesas R-Car CMM Driver");
> > > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.h
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..b0bb7349ebaa
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_cmm.h
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */
> > > +/*
> > > + * rcar_cmm.h -- R-Car Display Unit Color Management Module
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2019 Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#ifndef __RCAR_CMM_H__
> > > +#define __RCAR_CMM_H__
> > > +
> > > +#define CMM_GAMMA_LUT_SIZE 256
> > > +
> > > +struct drm_color_lut;
> > > +struct platform_device;
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * struct rcar_cmm_config - CMM configuration
> > > + *
> > > + * @lut: 1D-LUT configuration
> > > + * @lut.enable: 1D-LUT enable flag
> > > + * @lut.table: 1D-LUT table entries
> > > + * @lut.size: Number of 1D-LUT (max 256)
> >
> > s/1D-LUT/1D-LUT entries/
>
> ack, I'll change this.
>
> > > + */
> > > +struct rcar_cmm_config {
> > > + struct {
> > > + bool enable;
> > > + struct drm_color_lut *table;
> > > + unsigned int size;
> > > + } lut;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +int rcar_cmm_enable(struct platform_device *pdev);
> > > +void rcar_cmm_disable(struct platform_device *pdev);
> > > +
> > > +int rcar_cmm_setup(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > > + const struct rcar_cmm_config *config);
> > > +
> > > +#endif /* __RCAR_CMM_H__ */

--
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-27 18:34    [W:0.164 / U:2.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site