Re: [PATCH v5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Add Display Port dt node

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Tanmay Shah (2020-08-10 19:15:53)
> @@ -2440,6 +2447,71 @@ dsi_phy: dsi-phy@ae94400 {
>  
>                                 status = "disabled";
>                         };
> +
> +                       msm_dp: displayport-controller@ae90000 {
> +                               status = "disabled";
> +                               compatible = "qcom,sc7180-dp";
> +
> +                               reg = <0 0x0ae90000 0 0x1400>;
> +
> +                               interrupt-parent = <&mdss>;
> +                               interrupts = <12 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;

Please drop the flags. It's not required per the binding. It should just
be a single number, i.e. <12>.

> +
> +                               clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_AHB_CLK>,
> +                                        <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_AUX_CLK>,
> +                                        <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_LINK_CLK>,
> +                                        <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_LINK_INTF_CLK>,
> +                                        <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_PIXEL_CLK>;
> +                               clock-names = "core_iface", "core_aux", "ctrl_link",
> +                                             "ctrl_link_iface", "stream_pixel";
> +                               #clock-cells = <1>;
> +                               assigned-clocks = <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_LINK_CLK_SRC>,
> +                                                 <&dispcc DISP_CC_MDSS_DP_PIXEL_CLK_SRC>;
> +                               assigned-clock-parents = <&msm_dp 0>, <&msm_dp 1>;
> +
> +                               operating-points-v2 = <&dp_opp_table>;
> +                               power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7180_CX>;

Can you send another patch to add the hpd pinctrl binding for the hpd
function? It would be useful to have that in the SoC level in case any
board wants to use the hpd pin on this SoC without having to implement
it themselves. It could be assigned here too as the pinctrl but I'm not
sure if that is correct. Probably better to just have it in the SoC file
and then let boards pick to use it.

> +
> +                               ports {
> +                                       #address-cells = <1>;
> +                                       #size-cells = <0>;
> +                                       port@0 {
> +                                               reg = <0>;
> +                                               dp_in: endpoint {
> +                                                       remote-endpoint = <&dpu_intf0_out>;
> +                                               };
> +                                       };
> +
> +                                       port@1 {
> +                                               reg = <1>;
> +                                               dp_out: endpoint { };
> +                                       };
> +                               };
> +
> +                               dp_opp_table: dp-opp-table {

Can this be called opp-table? I don't see the need to make it more
specific given that it doesn't share the namespace at this level with
anything else that is an opp table.

> +                                       compatible = "operating-points-v2";
> +
> +                                       opp-160000000 {
> +                                               opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <160000000>;
> +                                               required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
> +                                       };
> +
> +                                       opp-270000000 {
> +                                               opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <270000000>;
> +                                               required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs>;
> +                                       };
> +
> +                                       opp-540000000 {
> +                                               opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <540000000>;
> +                                               required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs_l1>;
> +                                       };
> +
> +                                       opp-810000000 {
> +                                               opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <810000000>;
> +                                               required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
> +                                       };
> +                               };
> +                       };
>                 };
>  
>                 dispcc: clock-controller@af00000 {
> @@ -2449,8 +2521,8 @@ dispcc: clock-controller@af00000 {
>                                  <&gcc GCC_DISP_GPLL0_CLK_SRC>,
>                                  <&dsi_phy 0>,
>                                  <&dsi_phy 1>,
> -                                <0>,
> -                                <0>;
> +                                <&msm_dp 0>,
> +                                <&msm_dp 1>;

This bit will have to change when the DP phy is split off into the qmp
driver.

>                         clock-names = "bi_tcxo",
>                                       "gcc_disp_gpll0_clk_src",
>                                       "dsi0_phy_pll_out_byteclk",