Re: [PATCH v7 3/7] fixup! media: i2c: rdacm21: Break-out ov10640 initialization

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Jacopo,

Thank you for the patch.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 07:55:01PM +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> The embedded OV490 ISP chip provides a secondary SCCB interface and
> two GPIO lines to control the connected OV10640 image sensor.
> 
> Break out the OV10640 initialization from the OV490 initialization and
> explicitely control the powerdown and reset GPIOs. After the image

s/explicitely/explicitly/

> sensor has been hard reset, implement a more clear handling of the
> secondary SCCB interface to read the image sensor chip ID.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> index 0428e3209463..944009687de5 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/rdacm21.c
> @@ -30,11 +30,24 @@
>  #define OV490_PAGE_HIGH_REG		0xfffd
>  #define OV490_PAGE_LOW_REG		0xfffe
>  
> +/*
> + * The SCCB slave handling is undocumented; the registers naming scheme is
> + * totally arbitrary.
> + */
> +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_WRITE		0x00
> +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_READ		0x01
> +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR		0x80195000
> +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_HIGH	0x80195001
> +#define OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_LOW	0x80195002
> +
>  #define OV490_DVP_CTRL3			0x80286009
>  
>  #define OV490_ODS_CTRL_FRAME_OUTPUT_EN	0x0c
>  #define OV490_ODS_CTRL			0x8029d000
>  
> +#define OV490_HOST_CMD			0x808000c0
> +#define OV490_HOST_CMD_TRIGGER		0xc1
> +
>  #define OV490_ID_VAL			0x0490
>  #define OV490_ID(_p, _v)		((((_p) & 0xff) << 8) | ((_v) & 0xff))
>  #define OV490_PID			0x8080300a
> @@ -42,12 +55,22 @@
>  #define OV490_PID_TIMEOUT		20
>  #define OV490_OUTPUT_EN_TIMEOUT		300
>  
> +#define OV490_GPIO0_RESETB		0x01

Shouldn't this be named just OV490_GPIO0 ? The fact that it's connected
to the RESETB signal of the OV10640 is board-specific, not an OV490
intrinsic property.

BIT(0) ?

> +#define OV490_SPWDN0			0x01

Same here.

> +#define OV490_GPIO_SEL0			0x80800050
> +#define OV490_GPIO_SEL1			0x80800051
> +#define OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION0		0x80800054
> +#define OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION1		0x80800055
> +#define OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0	0x80800058
> +#define OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE1	0x80800059
> +
>  #define OV490_ISP_HSIZE_LOW		0x80820060
>  #define OV490_ISP_HSIZE_HIGH		0x80820061
>  #define OV490_ISP_VSIZE_LOW		0x80820062
>  #define OV490_ISP_VSIZE_HIGH		0x80820063
>  
> -#define OV10640_ID_LOW			0xa6
> +#define OV10640_ID_HIGH			0xa6
> +#define OV10640_CHIP_ID			0x300a
>  #define OV10640_PIXEL_RATE		55000000
>  
>  struct rdacm21_device {
> @@ -306,6 +329,39 @@ static const struct v4l2_subdev_ops rdacm21_subdev_ops = {
>  	.pad		= &rdacm21_subdev_pad_ops,
>  };
>  
> +static int ov10640_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
> +{
> +	u8 val;
> +
> +	/* Power-up OV10640 by setting RESETB and PWDNB pins high. */
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_SEL0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_SEL1, OV490_SPWDN0);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_DIRECTION1, OV490_SPWDN0);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0, OV490_GPIO0_RESETB);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_GPIO_OUTPUT_VALUE0, OV490_SPWDN0);
> +	usleep_range(3000, 5000);

So the OV490 firmware doesn't handle this ?

> +
> +	/* Read OV10640 ID to test communications. */
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE_READ);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_HIGH, OV10640_CHIP_ID >> 8);
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_ADDR_LOW, (u8)OV10640_CHIP_ID);
> +
> +	/* Trigger SCCB slave transaction and give it some time to complete. */
> +	ov490_write_reg(dev, OV490_HOST_CMD, OV490_HOST_CMD_TRIGGER);
> +	usleep_range(1000, 1500);
> +
> +	ov490_read_reg(dev, OV490_SCCB_SLAVE0_DIR, &val);
> +	if (val != OV10640_ID_HIGH) {
> +		dev_err(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID mismatch: (0x%02x)\n", val);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}

Would it make sense to create an ov490_sensor_read() helper ?

> +
> +	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID = 0x%2x\n", val);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int ov490_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
>  {
>  	u8 pid, ver, val;
> @@ -349,20 +405,11 @@ static int ov490_initialize(struct rdacm21_device *dev)
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}
>  
> -	/* Read OV10640 Id to test communications. */
> -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195000, 0x01);
> -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195001, 0x30);
> -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x80195002, 0x0a);
> -	ov490_write_reg(dev, 0x808000c0, 0xc1);
> -
> -	ov490_read_reg(dev, 0x80195000, &val);
> -	if (val != OV10640_ID_LOW) {
> -		dev_err(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID mismatch: (0x%02x)\n", val);
> -		return -ENODEV;
> -	}
> -
> -	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "OV10640 ID = 0x%2x\n", val);
> +	ret = ov10640_initialize(dev);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  
> +	/* Program OV490 with register-value table. */
>  	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ov490_regs_wizard); ++i) {
>  		ret = ov490_write(dev, ov490_regs_wizard[i].reg,
>  				  ov490_regs_wizard[i].val);

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart