All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Devarsh Thakkar" <devarsht@ti.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Expose session management as plane properties
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 21:58:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-178284@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261019213726.4145532-11-devarsht@ti.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 5 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: lock inversion between device->lock and drm_dev_enter()
- [Medium] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: session properties not synced on disable or idle commits
- [Medium] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: disabling refresh_mode_init sets refresh_mode to -1
- [Medium] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: fast LUT preload missed or clobbered by session modes
- [Medium] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: runtime PM calls outside device->lock race with master_drop()
--

commit 96a2ccec634e73c5b82d2f3b3b5d2292c57d3429
Author: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com>

drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Expose session management as plane properties

This commit exposes the clear_on_init, clear_on_close, clear_on_disable, and
refresh_mode_init session management settings as DRM plane enum properties. It
also introduces a device mutex to serialize session state and panel access
between atomic commits and DRM master callbacks.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd16xx.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd16xx.c
> index 6037717635a48..13bd825bf3f17 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd16xx.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/solomon/ssd16xx.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -1576,6 +1664,24 @@ static int ssd16xx_plane_atomic_check(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  						   false, false);
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Copy the session properties of a plane state into the device.  Called from
> + * both crtc_atomic_enable() and plane_atomic_update(): the former runs first
> + * in a commit, so it must not rely on values only synced by the latter.
> + */
> +static void ssd16xx_sync_session_props(struct ssd16xx_device *device,
> +				       const struct ssd16xx_plane_state *ssd_state)
> +{
> +	lockdep_assert_held(&device->lock);
> +
> +	device->refresh_mode = ssd_state->refresh_mode;
> +	device->color_mode = ssd_state->color_mode;
> +	device->clear_on_init = ssd_state->clear_on_init;
> +	device->clear_on_close = ssd_state->clear_on_close;
> +	device->clear_on_disable = ssd_state->clear_on_disable;
> +	device->refresh_mode_init = ssd_state->refresh_mode_init;
> +}
> +
>  static void ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  					struct drm_atomic_commit *state)
>  {
> @@ -1619,6 +1725,8 @@ static void ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  	drm_dbg(&device->drm, "plane_atomic_update: calling fb_dirty rect=(%d,%d)-(%d,%d)\n",
>  		rect.x1, rect.y1, rect.x2, rect.y2);
>  
> +	mutex_lock(&device->lock);
> +
>  	/* Diff refresh_mode against the plane's own previous state to see
>  	 * whether fast LUT preload is needed.
>  	 */
> @@ -1635,8 +1743,7 @@ static void ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  			device->fast_lut_pending = false;
>  	}
>  
> -	device->refresh_mode = new_ssd->refresh_mode;
> -	device->color_mode = new_ssd->color_mode;
> +	ssd16xx_sync_session_props(device, new_ssd);

[Severity: Medium]
Can session property updates be missed when a commit has no framebuffer
damage, detaches the framebuffer, or occurs while the CRTC is inactive?

In ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(), ssd16xx_sync_session_props() is called
after the early exits for a NULL framebuffer and empty damage:

	if (!fb)
		goto out_exit;

	/* Nothing to draw: don't wake the panel up. */
	if (!drm_atomic_helper_damage_merged(old_state, new_state, &rect))
		goto out_exit;

In addition, drm_atomic_helper_commit_tail_rpm() passes
DRM_PLANE_COMMIT_ACTIVE_ONLY to drm_atomic_helper_commit_planes(), which
skips ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update() whenever the CRTC is inactive.

If userspace updates clear_on_close or clear_on_disable in a property-only
commit with no damage, while fb is NULL, or while the CRTC is disabled, will
ssd16xx_device retain the stale values when ssd16xx_drm_master_drop() or
ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable() later runs?

[Severity: Medium]
Does fast_lut_pending account for refresh_mode_init and the clear_on_*
session modes?

In ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(), device->fast_lut_pending is computed from
old_ssd->refresh_mode and new_ssd->refresh_mode before device->refresh_mode
is overridden by device->refresh_mode_init:

	if (old_ssd->refresh_mode != new_ssd->refresh_mode) {
		if (new_ssd->refresh_mode == SSD16XX_REFRESH_FAST &&
		    old_ssd->refresh_mode != SSD16XX_REFRESH_FULL)
			device->fast_lut_pending = true;
		else
			device->fast_lut_pending = false;
	}

	ssd16xx_sync_session_props(device, new_ssd);

	saved_mode = device->refresh_mode;
	saved_border_waveform_idx = device->border_waveform_update_idx;
	if (device->init_refresh_pending) {
		device->refresh_mode = device->refresh_mode_init;
		device->border_waveform_update_idx = device->border_waveform_init_idx;
	}

	if (device->fast_lut_pending) {
		ret = ssd16xx_preload_fast_lut(device);
		...
		device->fast_lut_pending = false;
	}

If new_ssd->refresh_mode is SSD16XX_REFRESH_PARTIAL and refresh_mode_init is
set to fast, fast_lut_pending remains false and the first frame runs a fast
refresh (0xC7) without preloading the fast LUT. Conversely, if
new_ssd->refresh_mode transitions to SSD16XX_REFRESH_FAST while
refresh_mode_init is set to partial, ssd16xx_preload_fast_lut() runs and
clears fast_lut_pending before the init frame, which then runs a partial
refresh (0xFF) that overwrites the LUT in the controller, leaving subsequent
fast frames without the fast LUT.

Similarly, if clear_on_init, clear_on_disable, or clear_on_close is set to
fast, ssd16xx_clear_display() sends SSD1683_CTRL2_FAST_REFRESH without
preloading the fast LUT, and if clear_on_init is set to partial while
refresh_mode is fast, ssd16xx_clear_display_on_init() overwrites the LUT
loaded by ssd16xx_hw_init() without re-arming fast_lut_pending.

>  
>  	/*
>  	 * When refresh_mode_init was set, use the specified mode for this first
> @@ -1693,6 +1800,8 @@ static void ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  		device->border_waveform_pending = true;
>  	}
>  
> +	mutex_unlock(&device->lock);
> +
>  	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(device->drm.dev);
>  	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(device->drm.dev);
>  
> @@ -1754,6 +1863,8 @@ static void ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  	if (!drm_dev_enter(&device->drm, &idx))
>  		return;
>  
> +	mutex_lock(&device->lock);
> +
>  	if (device->clear_on_disable < 0 || device->cleared_on_disable)
>  		goto out;

[Severity: Medium]
Should ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable() also sync the session properties from
the commit's new primary plane state before checking
device->clear_on_disable?

Because the driver uses drm_atomic_helper_commit_tail_rpm(),
drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_disables() runs
ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable() before drm_atomic_helper_commit_planes(), and
drm_atomic_helper_commit_planes() skips disabled CRTCs due to
DRM_PLANE_COMMIT_ACTIVE_ONLY. If userspace sets clear_on_disable or
clear_on_close in the same atomic commit that disables the CRTC,
ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable() and ssd16xx_drm_master_drop() will not see the
updated plane state.

>  
> @@ -1775,6 +1886,7 @@ static void ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  	device->cleared_on_disable = true;
>  	pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(device->drm.dev);
>  out:
> +	mutex_unlock(&device->lock);
>  	drm_dev_exit(idx);
>  }
>  
> @@ -1782,6 +1894,8 @@ static void ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  				       struct drm_atomic_commit *state)
>  {
>  	struct ssd16xx_device *device = crtc_to_ssd16xx_device(crtc);
> +	struct drm_plane_state *new_plane_state =
> +		drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state(state, &device->primary_plane);
>  	int ret, idx;
>  
>  	if (!drm_dev_enter(&device->drm, &idx))
> @@ -1797,16 +1911,28 @@ static void ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  	drm_dbg(&device->drm, "atomic_enable: %dx%d orientation=%u°\n",
>  		device->width, device->height, device->orientation);
>  
> +	/* Serialise hw_init and session-prop setup against master_drop(). */
> +	mutex_lock(&device->lock);
> +
>  	if (!device->initialized) {
>  		ret = ssd16xx_hw_init(device);
>  		if (ret) {
>  			drm_err(&device->drm, "atomic_enable: hw_init failed: %d\n", ret);
> +			mutex_unlock(&device->lock);
>  			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(device->drm.dev);
>  			drm_dev_exit(idx);
>  			return;
>  		}
>  		device->initialized = true;
>  	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * atomic_enable runs before plane_atomic_update, so pick up the session
> +	 * properties of this very commit instead of the previous one's.
> +	 */
> +	if (new_plane_state)
> +		ssd16xx_sync_session_props(device, to_ssd16xx_plane_state(new_plane_state));

[Severity: Medium]
Should ssd16xx_sync_session_props() be called before ssd16xx_hw_init() and
pm_runtime_resume_and_get()?

Inside ssd16xx_hw_init(), device->refresh_mode is checked to decide whether
to preload the fast LUT:

	if (device->refresh_mode == SSD16XX_REFRESH_FAST) {
		...
	}

Because ssd16xx_hw_init() runs before ssd16xx_sync_session_props(), it reads
the previous commit's refresh_mode rather than the new plane state's
refresh_mode.

[Severity: Medium]
Additionally, in both ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable() and
ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(), pm_runtime_resume_and_get() is called before
mutex_lock(&device->lock), and pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() is called after
mutex_unlock(&device->lock):

	ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(device->drm.dev);
	...
	mutex_lock(&device->lock);
	...
	mutex_unlock(&device->lock);

	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(device->drm.dev);
	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(device->drm.dev);

When the panel is runtime-suspended, pm_runtime_resume_and_get()
synchronously runs ssd16xx_pm_runtime_resume() -> ssd16xx_hw_init() and sets
device->initialized = true without holding device->lock, racing with
ssd16xx_drm_master_drop(). Furthermore, if a nonblocking commit in
ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update() holds the runtime PM reference while waiting on
mutex_lock(&device->lock), ssd16xx_drm_master_drop()'s call to
pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend() will see usage_count > 0 and fail to suspend
the panel, and once ssd16xx_drm_master_drop() releases device->lock, the
unblocked ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update() will draw over the screen that
clear_on_close just cleared.

> +
>  	device->cleared_on_disable = false;
>  
>  	/* Clear display on first app launch if configured */
> @@ -1826,6 +1952,8 @@ static void ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
>  		device->init_refresh_pending = true;
>  	}

[Severity: Medium]
What happens when a client opens the DRM device and then sets the
refresh_mode_init plane property to disabled?

When the device is opened on a panel where refresh_mode_init >= 0 by default
(such as GDEY042T81, where default_refresh_mode_init is
SSD16XX_REFRESH_FULL), ssd16xx_drm_master_set() sets
device->init_refresh_pending = true before the client can change plane
properties:

	if (device->refresh_mode_init >= 0)
		device->init_refresh_pending = true;

If the client then sets refresh_mode_init to SSD16XX_SESSION_DISABLED (which
maps to internal value -1), ssd16xx_sync_session_props() sets
device->refresh_mode_init = -1, but neither ssd16xx_sync_session_props() nor
ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable() clears device->init_refresh_pending when
device->refresh_mode_init < 0.

When ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update() subsequently runs:

	if (device->init_refresh_pending) {
		device->refresh_mode = device->refresh_mode_init;
		device->border_waveform_update_idx = device->border_waveform_init_idx;
	}

device->refresh_mode is set to -1, causing ssd16xx_fb_dirty() to fall through
to the default partial refresh case with the init border waveform (and skip
3-color red buffer setup) instead of using the configured refresh_mode.

Conversely, if device->refresh_mode_init was -1 when ssd16xx_drm_master_set()
ran and the client enables refresh_mode_init in a plane update on an
already-active CRTC where ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable() does not run,
device->init_refresh_pending is never armed.

>  
> +	mutex_unlock(&device->lock);
> +
>  	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(device->drm.dev);
>  	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(device->drm.dev);
>  	drm_dev_exit(idx);

[ ... ]

> @@ -1963,6 +2140,12 @@ static void ssd16xx_drm_master_drop(struct drm_device *drm,
>  	struct ssd16xx_device *device = to_ssd16xx_device(drm);
>  	int ret, idx;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Not serialized against nonblocking commits by the DRM core (e.g. on
> +	 * DROP_MASTER), so hold the lock across the panel clear too.
> +	 */
> +	guard(mutex)(&device->lock);
> +
>  	device->init_refresh_pending = false;
>  	device->first_clear_done = false;

[Severity: High]
Does acquiring device->lock before drm_dev_enter() in
ssd16xx_drm_master_drop() create a lock inversion with the atomic commit
callbacks?

In ssd16xx_drm_master_drop(), guard(mutex)(&device->lock) acquires
device->lock before calling drm_dev_enter(drm, &idx) (which acquires
drm_unplug_srcu):

	guard(mutex)(&device->lock);
	...
	if (!drm_dev_enter(drm, &idx))
		return;

However, ssd16xx_plane_atomic_update(), ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_disable(), and
ssd16xx_crtc_atomic_enable() all call drm_dev_enter(&device->drm, &idx)
before acquiring mutex_lock(&device->lock):

	if (!drm_dev_enter(&device->drm, &idx))
		return;

	mutex_lock(&device->lock);

Will this reverse locking order between device->lock and drm_unplug_srcu
trigger a lockdep circular locking dependency warning when a client commits a
frame and then drops master with clear_on_close enabled?

>  

[ ... ]

>
> -- 
> 2.34.1

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261019213726.4145532-1-devarsht@ti.com?part=10

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-19 21:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-19 21:37 [PATCH v3 00/14] Add DRM driver for Solomon SSD16xx e-paper display controllers Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add Dalian Good Display Co., Ltd Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] dt-bindings: display: Add Solomon SSD16xx e-paper controller Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-20  8:34   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] dt-bindings: display: solomon,ssd16xx: Add Solomon SSD1677 controller Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37   ` [PATCH v3 03/14] dt-bindings: display: solomon, ssd16xx: " Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:44   ` [PATCH v3 03/14] dt-bindings: display: solomon,ssd16xx: " sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] drm/solomon: Add DRM driver for Solomon SSD16xx e-paper display controllers Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 22:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Add clear_on_init/close/disable session management Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:59   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Add support for Solomon SSD1677 controller Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Add power management support Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:57   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Expose refresh mode as plane property Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 22:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Expose color " Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:52   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: Expose session management as plane properties Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:58   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-20 10:32   ` Markus Elfring
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] drm/solomon: ssd16xx: support panels whose RAM X order is reversed Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for Solomon SSD16xx DRM driver Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] arm64: defconfig: Enable DRM_SSD16XX for AM62L3 EVM Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:37 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] arm64: dts: ti: [DO_NOT_MERGE] Add AM62L3 EVM overlay for GDEY042T81 e-paper display Devarsh Thakkar
2026-10-19 21:59   ` sashiko-bot

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=sashiko-outbox-178284@kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devarsht@ti.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.