Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: mediatek: add mdp3 mutex support for mt8186

[Matthias Brugger]

On 08/07/2022 10:14, allen-kh.cheng wrote:
> Hi Angelo,
>
> On Thu, 2022-07-07 at 12:59 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > Il 07/07/22 12:41, Matthias Brugger ha scritto:
> > > On 07/07/2022 10:52, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > > Il 05/07/22 14:26, Allen-KH Cheng ha scritto:
> > > > > Add mdp3 mutex compatible for mt8186 SoC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiandong Wang <xiandong.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please drop this commit. Adding a mdp3-mutex compatible is not
> > > > needed here.
> > >
> > > Thanks for checking. We probably would need a fallback compatible.
> > > We can only know
> > > from the HW engineers that can confirm if the IP block is the same
> > > as the disp
> > > mutex or a different one.
> > >
> > > I'll drop both patches for now until things got clear.
> >
> > They're located in a different iospace from each other, but either
> > the platform
> > data needs to *not be* joined together, or if they're together, I
> > would not like
> > having two different compatible strings for essentially the same
> > thing.
> >
> > I would at this point prefer dropping '-disp' from 'mediatek,mt8186-
> > disp-mutex'
> > so that we would be able to declare two 'mediatek,mt8186-mutex' in
> > devicetree...
> > ...or simply have two mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex (although logically
> > incorrect?).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Angelo
>
> Thanks for your opinion.
>
> They are two different hardwares for different address spaces.
>
> I think we drop '-disp' from 'mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex' will be
> excessive because we also need to modify mutex node in all exited dts
> files.
>
> I prefer havingg two mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex.
>
> ex:
> mutex: mutex@14001000 {
> 	compatible = "mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex";
> 	..
> }
>
> mdp3_mutex0: mutex@1b001000 {
> 	compatible = "mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex";
> 	...
> }
>
> What do you think?

I think that's an acceptable solution.

Regards,
Matthias

> Best regards,
> Allen
>
> > > Regards,
> > > Matthias
> > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >   
> > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,mutex.yaml
> > > > >    | 1 +
> > > > >    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git
> > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,mutex
> > > > > .yaml
> > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,mutex
> > > > > .yaml
> > > > > index 627dcc3e8b32..234fa5dc07c2 100644
> > > > > ---
> > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,mutex
> > > > > .yaml
> > > > > +++
> > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,mutex
> > > > > .yaml
> > > > > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ properties:
> > > > >          - mediatek,mt8173-disp-mutex
> > > > >          - mediatek,mt8183-disp-mutex
> > > > >          - mediatek,mt8186-disp-mutex
> > > > > +      - mediatek,mt8186-mdp3-mutex
> > > > >          - mediatek,mt8192-disp-mutex
> > > > >          - mediatek,mt8195-disp-mutex