linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] drm/bridge: Support hotplugging panel-bridge.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <7ce4f741-309a-2eaa-381c-8033f089651a@samsung.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:29:07 +0200
From:   Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Philippe Cornu <philippe.cornu@...com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] drm/bridge: Support hotplugging panel-bridge.

On 22.06.2017 11:23, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:47:43 +0530
> Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
>> On 06/22/2017 01:20 PM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>>> 2017-06-20 19:31 GMT+02:00 Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>:  
>>>> Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> writes:
>>>>  
>>>>> On 06/16/2017 08:13 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:  
>>>>>> Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> writes:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> On 06/16/2017 02:11 AM, Eric Anholt wrote:  
>>>>>>>> If the panel-bridge is being set up after the drm_mode_config_reset(),
>>>>>>>> then the connector's state would never get initialized, and we'd
>>>>>>>> dereference the NULL in the hotplug path.  We also need to register
>>>>>>>> the connector, so that userspace can get at it.
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Shouldn't the KMS driver make sure the panel-bridge is set up before
>>>>>>> drm_mode_config_reset? Is it the case when we're inserting the
>>>>>>> panel-bridge driver as a module?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the connectors that have been added are registered automatically
>>>>>>> when drm_dev_register() is called by the KMS driver. Registering a
>>>>>>> connector in the middle of setting up our driver is prone to race
>>>>>>> conditions if the userspace decides to use them immediately.  
>>>>>> Yeah, this is fixing initializing panel_bridge at DSI host_attach time,
>>>>>> which in the case of a panel module that creates the DSI device
>>>>>> (adv7533-style, like you said I should use as a reference) will be after
>>>>>> drm_mode_config_reset() and drm_dev_register().  
>>>>> Okay. In the case of the msm kms driver, we defer probe until the
>>>>> adv7533 module is inserted, only then we proceed to drm_mode_config_reset()
>>>>> and drm_dev_register(). I assumed this was the general practice followed by
>>>>> most kms drivers. I.,e the kms driver defers probe until all connector
>>>>> related modules are inserted, and only then proceed to create a drm device.  
>>>> The problem, though, is the panel driver needs the MIPI DSI host to
>>>> exist to call mipi_dsi_device_register_full() during the probe process.
>>>> The adv7533 driver gets around this by registering the DSI device in the
>>>> bridge attach step, but drm_panel doesn't have an attach step.  
>> I'm not sure how we can get around this. We had discussion about this on irc
>> recently, but couldn't come up with a good conclusion. We could come up with a
>> panel_attach() callback to make it similar to bridges, but that's just us avoiding
>> the real issue.
> How about making DSI dev registration fully asynchronous, that is, DSI
> devs declared in the DT under the DSI host node will be
> registered/attached at probe time, and devs using another control bus
> (like the adv7533 controller over i2c) will be registered afterwards.
>
> That implies moving the drm_brige registration logic outside of the DSI
> host ->probe() path. The idea would be to check if all devs connected
> to the DSI bus are ready at dsi_host->attach() time. If they are, we
> can finally register the XXX -> DSI bridge. If they're not (because
> some devs connected to the DSI bus have not been probed yet), then we
> do not register the drm_bridge and wait for the next dsi_host->attach()
> event.

I guess you assumes that dsi-host knows all devs connected to it, thanks to:
- subnodes of the host - ie. devices controlled via dsi bus,
- graph links from host ports/endpoints - ie. devices controlled by
other buses, for example adv7533.

I would separate both abstractions to make it more clear:
1. MIPI bus should be registered early - to allow create/bind devices on it,
2. drm_bridge should be registered only if all required sinks
(bridges/panels) are registered.

First point seems OK, I am not sure about the 2nd one - if used
consistently, it would require building pipeline from sink to source.
By the way is there any pipeline with two consecutive external bridges
in the mainline?

Regards
Andrzej