On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 04:40:49PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On Thu 10 Mar 22, 15:54, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 03:32:00PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > While bridge/panel detection was initially relying on the usual
> > > port/ports-based of graph detection, it was recently changed to
> > > perform the lookup on any child node that is not port/ports
> > > instead when such a node is available, with no fallback on the
> > > usual way.
> > >
> > > This results in breaking detection when a child node is present
> > > but does not contain any panel or bridge node, even when the
> > > usual port/ports-based of graph is there.
> > >
> > > In order to support both situations properly, this commit reworks
> > > the logic to try both options and not just one of the two: it will
> > > only return -EPROBE_DEFER when both have failed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkow...@bootlin.com>
> > > Fixes: 80253168dbfd ("drm: of: Lookup if child node has panel or bridge")
> >
> > Thanks, it's in pretty good shape now, but I have a few bike sheds to paint
> > :)
> >
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> > > index 9d90cd75c457..67f1b7dfc892 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> > > @@ -219,6 +219,35 @@ int drm_of_encoder_active_endpoint(struct
> > > device_node *node,
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_of_encoder_active_endpoint);
> > >
> > > +static int drm_of_find_remote_panel_or_bridge(struct device_node *remote,
> > > + struct drm_panel **panel,
> > > + struct drm_bridge **bridge)
> >
> > This function performs its look up directly on the struct device_node
> > passed as argument, so I don't think the "remote" in the name is great.
> > Since it's static, we can just call it find_panel_or_bridge, what do you
> > think?
>
> From a quick look at other DRM code I got the impression that static functions
> also usually carry the drm prefix but I might be wrong.
Not necessarily, see handle_conflicting_encoders, commit_tail, commit_work,
convert_clip_rect_to_rect, edid_load, etc.
Most functions do, but it's not a rule or a convention.
> > > +{
> > > + int ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > > +
> > > + if (panel) {
> > > + *panel = of_drm_find_panel(remote);
> > > + if (!IS_ERR(*panel))
> > > + ret = 0;
> >
> > return 0?
>
> The idea was to still go through the "*bridge = NULL;" path if a bridge
> pointer is provided, to preserve the original behavior of the function.
> There may or may not not be any hard expectation on that, in any case
> I feel like it would be good to avoid out-of-scope functional changes here.
Then we could just clear it just like we clear the panel pointer in
drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge. It would be more consistent.
> > > + else
> > > + *panel = NULL;
> > > +
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /* No panel found yet, check for a bridge next. */
> > > + if (bridge) {
> > > + if (ret) {
> >
> > And the return above allows to remove that test
> >
> > > + *bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote);
> > > + if (*bridge)
> > > + ret = 0;
> >
> > return 0?
> >
> > > + } else {
> > > + *bridge = NULL;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> >
> > And here we can just return -EPROBE_DEFER
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > > /**
> > > * drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge - return connected panel or bridge device
> > > * @np: device tree node containing encoder output ports
> > > @@ -249,57 +278,33 @@ int drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(const struct
> > > device_node *np,
> > > if (panel)
> > > *panel = NULL;
> > >
> > > - /**
> > > - * Devices can also be child nodes when we also control that device
> > > - * through the upstream device (ie, MIPI-DCS for a MIPI-DSI device).
> > > - *
> > > - * Lookup for a child node of the given parent that isn't either port
> > > - * or ports.
> > > - */
> > > - for_each_available_child_of_node(np, remote) {
> > > - if (of_node_name_eq(remote, "port") ||
> > > - of_node_name_eq(remote, "ports"))
> > > - continue;
> > > -
> > > - goto of_find_panel_or_bridge;
> > > + /* Check for a graph on the device node first. */
> > > + if (of_graph_is_present(np)) {
> > > + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(np, port, endpoint);
> > > + if (remote) {
> > > + ret = drm_of_find_remote_panel_or_bridge(remote, panel,
> > > + bridge);
> > > + of_node_put(remote);
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > - /*
> > > - * of_graph_get_remote_node() produces a noisy error message if port
> > > - * node isn't found and the absence of the port is a legit case here,
> > > - * so at first we silently check whether graph presents in the
> > > - * device-tree node.
> > > - */
> > > - if (!of_graph_is_present(np))
> > > - return -ENODEV;
> > > -
> > > - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(np, port, endpoint);
> > > -
> > > -of_find_panel_or_bridge:
> > > - if (!remote)
> > > - return -ENODEV;
> > > + /* Otherwise check for any child node other than port/ports. */
> > > + if (ret) {
> > > + for_each_available_child_of_node(np, remote) {
> > > + if (of_node_name_eq(remote, "port") ||
> > > + of_node_name_eq(remote, "ports"))
> > > + continue;
> > >
> > > - if (panel) {
> > > - *panel = of_drm_find_panel(remote);
> > > - if (!IS_ERR(*panel))
> > > - ret = 0;
> > > - else
> > > - *panel = NULL;
> > > - }
> > > + ret = drm_of_find_remote_panel_or_bridge(remote, panel,
> > > + bridge);
> > > + of_node_put(remote);
> > >
> > > - /* No panel found yet, check for a bridge next. */
> > > - if (bridge) {
> > > - if (ret) {
> > > - *bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote);
> > > - if (*bridge)
> > > - ret = 0;
> > > - } else {
> > > - *bridge = NULL;
> > > + /* Stop at the first found occurrence. */
> > > + if (!ret)
> > > + break;
> > > }
> > > -
> > > }
> > >
> > > - of_node_put(remote);
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> >
> > So the diff is fairly hard to read, but it ends up as:
>
> Yeah I agree, not sure what I can do about that.
Nothing, really. I don't expect any change there, it just happens sometimes :)
Maxime
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
