Re: [PATCH] drm/exynos: update to use component match support

[Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>]

On 09/11/2014 08:37 AM, Inki Dae wrote:
> On 2014년 09월 10일 19:24, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>> Hi Inki,
>>
>> To test it properly I have to fix init/remove bugs [1].
>> Of course these bugs were not introduced by this patch,
>> but they prevented some basic tests.
> I had tested my patch with trats2 board, and works well without below
> patch set. hm.. it seems that there is other corner cases I missed. Can
> you give me more details about basic tests?

As the component framework is about bringing up/down the master when
all/some components becomes available/unavailable I have tested
what happens when I change availability of components using bind/unbind
sysfs properties, for example:
echo 11c80000.dsi >/sys/bus/platform/drivers/exynos-dsi/unbind
echo 11c80000.dsi >/sys/bus/platform/drivers/exynos-dsi/bind

Regards
Andrzej

>
>> [1]: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.samsung-soc/37266
>>
>> I have tested successfully your patch with trats and universal_c210 boards.
> Thanks for testing and above fixup patch set. Will look into them soon. :)
>
> Thanks,
> Inki Dae
>
>> Few additional comments below.
>>
>> On 09/01/2014 02:19 PM, Inki Dae wrote:
>>> Update Exynos's DRM driver to use component match support rater than
>>> add_components.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c |   40 ++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>>> index feee991..dae62c2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c
>>> @@ -503,16 +503,15 @@ static int compare_of(struct device *dev, void *data)
>>>  	return dev == (struct device *)data;
>>>  }
>> Nitpick.
>>
>> This is not a part of this patch but compare_of suggests it compares OF
>> nodes but this function compares devices, maybe compare_dev would be better.
>>
>>>  
>>> -static int exynos_drm_add_components(struct device *dev, struct master *m)
>>> +static struct component_match *exynos_drm_match_add(struct device *dev)
>>>  {
>>> +	struct component_match *match = NULL;
>>>  	struct component_dev *cdev;
>>>  	unsigned int attach_cnt = 0;
>>>  
>>>  	mutex_lock(&drm_component_lock);
>>>  
>>>  	list_for_each_entry(cdev, &drm_component_list, list) {
>>> -		int ret;
>>> -
>>>  		/*
>>>  		 * Add components to master only in case that crtc and
>>>  		 * encoder/connector device objects exist.
>>> @@ -527,16 +526,10 @@ static int exynos_drm_add_components(struct device *dev, struct master *m)
>>>  		/*
>>>  		 * fimd and dpi modules have same device object so add
>>>  		 * only crtc device object in this case.
>>> -		 *
>>> -		 * TODO. if dpi module follows driver-model driver then
>>> -		 * below codes can be removed.
>>>  		 */
>>>  		if (cdev->crtc_dev == cdev->conn_dev) {
>>> -			ret = component_master_add_child(m, compare_of,
>>> -					cdev->crtc_dev);
>>> -			if (ret < 0)
>>> -				return ret;
>>> -
>>> +			component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of,
>>> +						cdev->crtc_dev);
>>>  			goto out_lock;
>>>  		}
>>>  
>>> @@ -546,11 +539,8 @@ static int exynos_drm_add_components(struct device *dev, struct master *m)
>>>  		 * connector/encoder need pipe number of crtc when they
>>>  		 * are created.
>>>  		 */
>>> -		ret = component_master_add_child(m, compare_of, cdev->crtc_dev);
>>> -		ret |= component_master_add_child(m, compare_of,
>>> -							cdev->conn_dev);
>>> -		if (ret < 0)
>>> -			return ret;
>>> +		component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of, cdev->crtc_dev);
>>> +		component_match_add(dev, &match, compare_of, cdev->conn_dev);
>>>  
>>>  out_lock:
>>>  		mutex_lock(&drm_component_lock);
>>> @@ -558,7 +548,7 @@ out_lock:
>>>  
>>>  	mutex_unlock(&drm_component_lock);
>>>  
>>> -	return attach_cnt ? 0 : -ENODEV;
>>> +	return attach_cnt ? match : ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  static int exynos_drm_bind(struct device *dev)
>>> @@ -572,13 +562,13 @@ static void exynos_drm_unbind(struct device *dev)
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  static const struct component_master_ops exynos_drm_ops = {
>>> -	.add_components = exynos_drm_add_components,
>>>  	.bind		= exynos_drm_bind,
>>>  	.unbind		= exynos_drm_unbind,
>>>  };
>>>  
>>>  static int exynos_drm_platform_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  {
>>> +	struct component_match *match;
>>>  	int ret;
>>>  
>>>  	pdev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32);
>>> @@ -645,13 +635,19 @@ static int exynos_drm_platform_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  		goto err_unregister_ipp_drv;
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>> -	ret = component_master_add(&pdev->dev, &exynos_drm_ops);
>>> -	if (ret < 0)
>>> -		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("re-tried by last sub driver probed later.\n");
>>> +	match = exynos_drm_match_add(&pdev->dev);
>>> +	if (IS_ERR(match)) {
>>> +		ret = PTR_ERR(match);
>>> +		goto err_unregister_ipp_dev;
>>> +	}
>>>  
>>> -	return 0;
>>> +	return component_master_add_with_match(&pdev->dev, &exynos_drm_ops,
>>> +						match);
>> In case component_master_add_with_match fails there will be no cleanup -
>> platform devices and drivers will not be removed.
>>
>>> +
>>> +err_unregister_ipp_dev:
>>>  
>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_DRM_EXYNOS_IPP
>>> +	exynos_platform_device_ipp_unregister();
>> It should not be a part of this patch.
>>
>> Regards
>> Andrzej
>>
>>>  err_unregister_ipp_drv:
>>>  	platform_driver_unregister(&ipp_driver);
>>>  err_unregister_gsc_drv:
>>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel