linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: add debugfs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <1b56a11c-194d-0eca-4dd1-48e91820eafb@samsung.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jul 2019 14:31:20 +0200
From:   Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: add debugfs

On 02.07.2019 17:44, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
>
> Add a debugfs file to show status registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> index f1a2493b86d9..a6f27648c015 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
>  #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>  #include <linux/i2c.h>
>  #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> @@ -109,6 +110,7 @@ struct ti_sn_bridge {
>  	struct drm_dp_aux		aux;
>  	struct drm_bridge		bridge;
>  	struct drm_connector		connector;
> +	struct dentry			*debugfs;
>  	struct device_node		*host_node;
>  	struct mipi_dsi_device		*dsi;
>  	struct clk			*refclk;
> @@ -178,6 +180,42 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops ti_sn_bridge_pm_ops = {
>  	SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(ti_sn_bridge_suspend, ti_sn_bridge_resume, NULL)
>  };
>  
> +static int status_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)
> +{
> +	struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata = s->private;
> +	unsigned int reg, val;
> +
> +	seq_puts(s, "STATUS REGISTERS:\n");
> +
> +	pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev);
> +
> +	/* IRQ Status Registers, see Table 31 in datasheet */
> +	for (reg = 0xf0; reg <= 0xf8; reg++) {
> +		regmap_read(pdata->regmap, reg, &val);
> +		seq_printf(s, "[0x%02x] = 0x%08x\n", reg, val);
> +	}
> +
> +	pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(status);
> +
> +static void ti_sn_debugfs_init(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
> +{
> +	pdata->debugfs = debugfs_create_dir("ti_sn65dsi86", NULL);


If some day we will have board with two such bridges there will be a
problem.

Anyway:

Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>

 --
Regards
Andrzej



> +
> +	debugfs_create_file("status", 0600, pdata->debugfs, pdata,
> +			&status_fops);
> +}
> +
> +static void ti_sn_debugfs_remove(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
> +{
> +	debugfs_remove_recursive(pdata->debugfs);
> +	pdata->debugfs = NULL;
> +}
> +
>  /* Connector funcs */
>  static struct ti_sn_bridge *
>  connector_to_ti_sn_bridge(struct drm_connector *connector)
> @@ -869,6 +907,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>  
>  	drm_bridge_add(&pdata->bridge);
>  
> +	ti_sn_debugfs_init(pdata);
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -879,6 +919,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>  	if (!pdata)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> +	ti_sn_debugfs_remove(pdata);
> +
>  	of_node_put(pdata->host_node);
>  
>  	pm_runtime_disable(pdata->dev);