linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/sun4i: hdmi: add support for ddc-i2c-bus property

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: <yw1xk1h130ba.fsf@mansr.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:09:13 +0000
From:   Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
Cc:     David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/sun4i: hdmi: add support for ddc-i2c-bus property

Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 04:11:06PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>> Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 01:47:13PM +0000, Mans Rullgard wrote:
>> >> Sometimes it is desirabled to use a separate i2c controller for ddc
>> >> access.  This adds support for the ddc-i2c-bus property of the
>> >> hdmi-connector node, using the specified controller if provided.
>> >> 
>> >> Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@...sr.com>
>> >> ---
>> >>  drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h     |  1 +
>> >>  drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> >>  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >> 
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h
>> >> index b685ee11623d..b08c4453d47c 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h
>> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h
>> >> @@ -269,6 +269,7 @@ struct sun4i_hdmi {
>> >>  	struct clk		*tmds_clk;
>> >>  
>> >>  	struct i2c_adapter	*i2c;
>> >> +	struct i2c_adapter	*ddc_i2c;
>> >>  
>> >>  	/* Regmap fields for I2C adapter */
>> >>  	struct regmap_field	*field_ddc_en;
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c
>> >> index 061d2e0d9011..5b2fac79f5d6 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c
>> >> @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector)
>> >>  	struct edid *edid;
>> >>  	int ret;
>> >>  
>> >> -	edid = drm_get_edid(connector, hdmi->i2c);
>> >> +	edid = drm_get_edid(connector, hdmi->ddc_i2c ?: hdmi->i2c);
>> >
>> > You can't test whether ddc_i2c is NULL or not...
>> >
>> >>  	if (!edid)
>> >>  		return 0;
>> >>  
>> >> @@ -228,6 +228,28 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector)
>> >>  	return ret;
>> >>  }
>> >>  
>> >> +static struct i2c_adapter *sun4i_hdmi_get_ddc(struct device *dev)
>> >> +{
>> >> +	struct device_node *phandle, *remote;
>> >> +	struct i2c_adapter *ddc;
>> >> +
>> >> +	remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, -1);
>> >> +	if (!remote)
>> >> +		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> >> +
>> >> +	phandle = of_parse_phandle(remote, "ddc-i2c-bus", 0);
>> >> +	of_node_put(remote);
>> >> +	if (!phandle)
>> >> +		return NULL;
>> >> +
>> >> +	ddc = of_get_i2c_adapter_by_node(phandle);
>> >> +	of_node_put(phandle);
>> >> +	if (!ddc)
>> >> +		return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER);
>> >> +
>> >> +	return ddc;
>> >
>> > ... Since even in (most) error cases you're returning a !NULL pointer.
>> >
>> >> +}
>> >> +
>> >>  static const struct drm_connector_helper_funcs sun4i_hdmi_connector_helper_funcs = {
>> >>  	.get_modes	= sun4i_hdmi_get_modes,
>> >>  };
>> >> @@ -575,6 +597,12 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
>> >>  		goto err_disable_mod_clk;
>> >>  	}
>> >>  
>> >> +	hdmi->ddc_i2c = sun4i_hdmi_get_ddc(dev);
>> >> +	if (IS_ERR(hdmi->ddc_i2c)) {
>> 
>> ... which is checked here.
>> 
>> The property is optional, so the idea was to return null in that case
>> and use the built-in controller.  If the property exists but some error
>> occurs, we want to abort rather than proceed with the fallback which
>> almost certainly won't work.
>> 
>> Maybe I got something wrong in that logic.
>
> Indeed, I just got confused. I guess returning ENODEV in such a case,
> and testing for that, would make things more obvious.

There's also a case I hadn't thought of: property exists but isn't a
valid phandle.  What do you think is the correct action in that case?

-- 
Måns Rullgård