Message-ID: <87shhy7hdt.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net>
Date:   Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:01:18 -0700
From:   Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
To:     Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] drm: Allow DSI devices to be registered before the host registers.

Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org> writes:

> On 06/29/2017 04:09 PM, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>> On 29.06.2017 07:03, Archit Taneja wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/28/2017 01:28 AM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>>> When a mipi_dsi_host is registered, the DT is walked to find any child
>>>> nodes with compatible strings.  Those get registered as DSI devices,
>>>> and most DSI panel drivers are mipi_dsi_drivers that attach to those nodes.
>>>>
>>>> There is one special case currently, the adv7533 bridge, where the
>>>> bridge probes on I2C, and during the bridge attach step it looks up
>>>> the mipi_dsi_host and registers the mipi_dsi_device (for its own stub
>>>> mipi_dsi_driver).
>>>>
>>>> For the Raspberry Pi panel, though, we also need to attach on I2C (our
>>>> control bus), but don't have a bridge driver.  The lack of a bridge's
>>>> attach() step like adv7533 uses means that we aren't able to delay the
>>>> mipi_dsi_device creation until the mipi_dsi_host is present.
>>>>
>>>> To fix this, we extend mipi_dsi_device_register_full() to allow being
>>>> called with a NULL host, which puts the device on a queue waiting for
>>>> a host to appear.  When a new host is registered, we fill in the host
>>>> value and finish the device creation process.
>>> This is quite a nice idea. The only bothering thing is the info.of_node usage
>>> varies between child nodes (mipi_dsi_devs) and non-child nodes (i2c control
>>> bus).
>>>
>>> For DSI children expressed in DT, the of_node in info holds the DT node
>>> corresponding to the DSI child itself. For non-DT ones, this patch assumes
>>> that info.of_node stores the DSI host DT node. I think it should be okay as
>>> long as we mention the usage in a comment somewhere. The other option is to
>>> have a new info.host_node field to keep a track of the host DT node.
>> 
>> Field abuse is not a biggest issue.
>> 
>> This patch changes totally semantic of mipi_dsi_device_register_full.
>> Currently semantic of *_device_register* function is to create and add
>> device to existing bus, ie after return we have device attached to bus,
>> so it can be instantly used. With this change function can return some
>> unattached device, without warranty it will be ever attached - kind of
>> hidden deferring. Such change looks for me quite dangerous, even if it
>> looks convenient in this case.
>> 
>> As discussed in other thread more appealing solution for me would be:
>> 1. host creates dsi bus, but doesn't call component_add as it does not
>> have all required resources.
>> 2. host waits for all required dsi devs attached, gets registered panels
>> or bridges and calls component_add after that.
>> 3. in bind phase it has all it needs, hasn't it?
>
> This seems like it would work, but would require KMS drivers to restructure
> themselves around this approach. For KMS drivers that don't even use the
> component stuff, it might be asking too much.
>
> We could maybe consider Eric's patch as an intermediate solution, we should
> definitely put WARN_ON(!dsi->host) like checks for all the existing
> mipi_dsi_*() API.

Could you clarify which entrypoints you'd like a warning on?  Is it just
"everything that gets the host ops"?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists