Re: [PATCH v9] staging: fbtft: add tearing signal detect

From: carlis
Date: Wed Jan 27 2021 - 09:06:32 EST


On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 14:47:04 +0100
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Carlis,
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 2:03 PM Carlis <zhangxuezhi3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: zhangxuezhi <zhangxuezhi1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > For st7789v ic,add tearing signal detect to avoid screen tearing
> >
> > Signed-off-by: zhangxuezhi <zhangxuezhi1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v9: change pr_* to dev_*
>
> Thanks for the update!
>
> > --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_st7789v.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_st7789v.c
> > @@ -9,9 +9,12 @@
> > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > #include <linux/init.h>
> > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> > +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > +#include <linux/completion.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <video/mipi_display.h>
> > -
> > +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> > #include "fbtft.h"
> >
> > #define DRVNAME "fb_st7789v"
> > @@ -66,6 +69,32 @@ enum st7789v_command {
> > #define MADCTL_MX BIT(6) /* bitmask for column address order */
> > #define MADCTL_MY BIT(7) /* bitmask for page address order */
> >
> > +#define SPI_PANEL_TE_TIMEOUT 400
> > +static struct mutex te_mutex;/*mutex for tearing line*/
> > +static struct completion spi_panel_te;
> > +
> > +static irqreturn_t spi_panel_te_handler(int irq, void *data)
> > +{
> > + complete(&spi_panel_te);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void set_spi_panel_te_irq_status(struct fbtft_par *par,
> > bool enable) +{
> > + static int te_irq_count;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&te_mutex);
> > +
> > + if (enable) {
> > + if (++te_irq_count == 1)
> > + enable_irq(gpiod_to_irq(par->gpio.te));
> > + } else {
> > + if (--te_irq_count == 0)
> > + disable_irq(gpiod_to_irq(par->gpio.te));
> > + }
> > + mutex_unlock(&te_mutex);
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * init_display() - initialize the display controller
> > *
> > @@ -82,6 +111,33 @@ enum st7789v_command {
> > */
> > static int init_display(struct fbtft_par *par)
> > {
> > + int rc;
> > + struct device *dev = par->info->device;
> > +
> > + par->gpio.te = devm_gpiod_get_index_optional(dev, "te", 0,
> > GPIOD_IN);
> > + if (IS_ERR(par->gpio.te)) {
> > + rc = PTR_ERR(par->gpio.te);
> > + dev_err(par->info->device, "Failed to request te
> > gpio: %d\n", rc);
>
> This also prints an error in case of -EPROBE_DEFER.
> dev_err_probe()?
>
> > + return rc;
> > + }
> > + if (par->gpio.te) {
> > + init_completion(&spi_panel_te);
> > + mutex_init(&te_mutex);
> > + rc = devm_request_irq(dev,
> > + gpiod_to_irq(par->gpio.te),
> > + spi_panel_te_handler,
> > IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING,
> > + "TE_GPIO", par);
> > + if (rc) {
> > + dev_err(par->info->device, "TE request_irq
> > failed.\n");
> > + devm_gpiod_put(dev, par->gpio.te);
>
> No need to call devm_gpiod_put() here, as it's managed automatically.
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>

hi,i will fix in patch v11
regards
zhangxuezhi1