Message-ID: <20191107193007.GT23790@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:   Thu, 7 Nov 2019 20:30:07 +0100
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro@...renesas.com>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>,
        Biju Das <biju.das@...renesas.com>,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
        Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] drm: Add bus timings helper

On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:26:21PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Fabrizio,
> 
> Thank you for the patch.
> 
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 07:36:37PM +0100, Fabrizio Castro wrote:
> > Helper to provide bus timing information.
> 
> You may want to expand this a bit. And actually fix it too, as the
> helper you introduce isn't related to timings (same for the subject
> line).

Also the kerneldoc needs to be pulled into the templates under
Documentation/gpu. And since it's just one function, why not put this into
drm_of.c? Gets rid of a pile of overhead.

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro@...renesas.com>
> > 
> > ---
> > v2->v3:
> > * new patch
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile          |  3 +-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bus_timings.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/drm/drm_bus_timings.h     | 21 +++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bus_timings.c
> >  create mode 100644 include/drm/drm_bus_timings.h
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile
> > index 9f0d2ee..a270063 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile
> > @@ -17,7 +17,8 @@ drm-y       :=	drm_auth.o drm_cache.o \
> >  		drm_plane.o drm_color_mgmt.o drm_print.o \
> >  		drm_dumb_buffers.o drm_mode_config.o drm_vblank.o \
> >  		drm_syncobj.o drm_lease.o drm_writeback.o drm_client.o \
> > -		drm_client_modeset.o drm_atomic_uapi.o drm_hdcp.o
> > +		drm_client_modeset.o drm_atomic_uapi.o drm_hdcp.o \
> > +		drm_bus_timings.o
> >  
> >  drm-$(CONFIG_DRM_LEGACY) += drm_legacy_misc.o drm_bufs.o drm_context.o drm_dma.o drm_scatter.o drm_lock.o
> >  drm-$(CONFIG_DRM_LIB_RANDOM) += lib/drm_random.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bus_timings.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bus_timings.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..e2ecd22
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bus_timings.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0

DRM core is supposed to be MIT.
-Daniel

> > +#include <drm/drm_bus_timings.h>
> > +#include <linux/errno.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_graph.h>
> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +
> > +#define DRM_OF_LVDS_ODD		1
> > +#define DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN	2
> > +
> > +static int drm_of_lvds_get_port_pixels_type(struct device_node *port_node)
> > +{
> > +	bool even_pixels, odd_pixels;
> > +
> > +	even_pixels = of_property_read_bool(port_node, "dual-lvds-even-pixels");
> > +	odd_pixels = of_property_read_bool(port_node, "dual-lvds-odd-pixels");
> > +	return  even_pixels * DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN + odd_pixels * DRM_OF_LVDS_ODD;
> 
> s/  / /
> 
> But I would make these bitflags.
> 
> enum drm_of_lvds_pixels {
> 	DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN = BIT(0),
> 	DRM_OF_LVDS_ODD = BIT(1),
> };
> 
> static int drm_of_lvds_get_port_pixels_type(struct device_node *port)
> {
> 	bool even_pixels = of_property_read_bool(port, "dual-lvds-even-pixels");
> 	bool odd_pixels = of_property_read_bool(port, "dual-lvds-odd-pixels");
> 
> 	return (even_pixels ? DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN : 0) |
> 	       (odd_pixels ? DRM_OF_LVDS_ODD : 0);
> }
> 
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_configuration - get the dual-LVDS configuration
> 
> Should we name this drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order to better
> reflect its purpose ?
> 
> > + * @p1: device tree node corresponding to the first port of the source
> > + * @p2: device tree node corresponding to the second port of the source
> 
> Maybe port1 and port2 to make this more explicit ?
> 
> > + *
> > + * An LVDS dual-link bus is made of two connections, even pixels transit on one
> > + * connection, and odd pixels transit on the other connection.
> 
> To match the DT bindings documentation, I would recommand
> 
> "An LVDS dual-link connection is made of two links, with even pixels
> transitting on one link, and odd pixels on the other link."
> 
> > + * This function walks the DT (from the source ports to the sink ports) looking
> > + * for a dual-LVDS bus. A dual-LVDS bus is identfied by markers found on the DT
> > + * ports of the sink device(s). If such a bus is found, this function returns
> > + * its configuration (either p1 connected to the even pixels port and p2
> > + * connected to the odd pixels port, or p1 connected to the odd pixels port and
> > + * p2 connected to the even pixels port).
> 
> "walking the DT" sounds like the function goes through the whole graph.
> How about the following ?
> 
> /**
>  * drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_pixel_order - Get LVDS dual-link pixel order
>  * @port1: First DT port node of the Dual-link LVDS source
>  * @port2: Second DT port node of the Dual-link LVDS source
>  *
>  * An LVDS dual-link connection is made of two links, with even pixels
>  * transitting on one link, and odd pixels on the other link. This function
>  * returns, for two ports of an LVDS dual-link source, which port shall transmit
>  * the even and off pixels, based on the requirements of the connected sink.
>  *
>  * The pixel order is determined from the dual-lvds-even-pixels and
>  * dual-lvds-odd-pixels properties in the sink's DT port nodes. If those
>  * properties are not present, or if their usage is not valid, this function
>  * returns -EINVAL.
>  *
>  * @port1 and @port2 are typically DT sibling nodes, but may have different
>  * parents when, for instance, two separate LVDS encoders carry the even and odd
>  * pixels.
>  *
>  * Return:
>  * * DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS - @port1 carries even pixels and @port2
>  *   carries odd pixels
>  * * DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS - @port1 carries odd pixels and @port1
>  *   carries even pixels
>  * * -EINVAL - @port1 and @port2 are not connected to a dual-link LVDS sink, or
>  *   the sink configuration is invalid
>  */
> 
> We could also add -EPIPE as a return code for the case where port1 or
> port2 are not connected.
> 
> > + *
> > + * Return: A code describing the bus configuration when a valid dual-LVDS bus is
> > + * found, or an error code when no valid dual-LVDS bus is found
> > + *
> > + * Possible codes for the bus configuration are:
> > + *
> > + * - DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS: when p1 is connected to the even pixels
> > + *   port and p2 is connected to the odd pixels port
> > + * - DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_ODD_EVEN_PIXELS: when p1 is connected to the odd pixels
> > + *   port and p2 is connected to the even pixels port
> > + *
> > + */
> > +int drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_configuration(const struct device_node *p1,
> > +					    const struct device_node *p2)
> > +{
> > +	struct device_node *remote_p1 = NULL, *remote_p2 = NULL;
> > +	struct device_node *parent_p1 = NULL, *parent_p2 = NULL;
> 
> There's no need to initialize those two variables.
> 
> > +	struct device_node *ep1 = NULL, *ep2 = NULL;
> > +	u32 reg_p1, reg_p2;
> > +	int ret = -EINVAL, remote_p1_pt, remote_p2_pt;
> 
> Please split this last line, as it otherwise hides the initialization of
> ret in the middle.
> 
> > +
> > +	if (!p1 || !p2)
> > +		return ret;
> 
> You can return -EINVAL directly.
> 
> 
> > +	if (of_property_read_u32(p1, "reg", &reg_p1) ||
> > +	    of_property_read_u32(p2, "reg", &reg_p2))
> > +		return ret;
> 
> Same here.
> 
> > +	parent_p1 = of_get_parent(p1);
> > +	parent_p2 = of_get_parent(p2);
> > +	if (!parent_p1 || !parent_p2)
> > +		goto done;
> > +	ep1 = of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(parent_p1, reg_p1, 0);
> > +	ep2 = of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs(parent_p2, reg_p2, 0);
> > +	if (!ep1 || !ep2)
> > +		goto done;
> 
> If you only support the first endpoint, this should be mentioned in the
> documentation. Alternatively you could pass the endpoint nodes instead
> of the port nodes, or you could pass the endpoint number.
> 
> It's also a bit inefficient to use of_graph_get_endpoint_by_regs() when
> you already have the port nodes. How about adding the following helper
> function ?
> 
> struct device_node *of_graph_get_port_endpoint(struct device_node *port, int reg)
> {
> 	struct device_node *endpoint = NULL;
> 
> 	for_each_child_of_node(port, endpoint) {
> 		u32 id;
> 
> 		if (!of_node_name_eq(endpoint, "endpoint") ||
> 			continue;
> 
> 		if (reg == -1)
> 			return endpoint;
> 
> 		if (of_property_read_u32(node, "reg", &id) < 0)
> 			continue;
> 
> 		if (reg == id)
> 			return endpoint;
> 	}
> 
> 	return NULL;
> }
> 
> If you're concerned that adding a core helper would delay this patch
> series, you could add it as a local helper, and move it to of_graph.h in
> a second step.
> 
> > +	remote_p1 = of_graph_get_remote_port(ep1);
> > +	remote_p2 = of_graph_get_remote_port(ep2);
> > +	if (!remote_p1 || !remote_p2)
> > +		goto done;
> > +	remote_p1_pt = drm_of_lvds_get_port_pixels_type(remote_p1);
> > +	remote_p2_pt = drm_of_lvds_get_port_pixels_type(remote_p2);
> > +	/*
> > +	 * A valid dual-lVDS bus is found when one remote port is marked with
> > +	 * "dual-lvds-even-pixels", and the other remote port is marked with
> > +	 * "dual-lvds-odd-pixels", bail out if the markers are not right.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (!remote_p1_pt || !remote_p2_pt ||
> > +	    remote_p1_pt + remote_p2_pt != DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN + DRM_OF_LVDS_ODD)
> > +		goto done;
> > +	if (remote_p1_pt == DRM_OF_LVDS_EVEN)
> > +		/* The sink expects even pixels through the first port */
> > +		ret = DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS;
> > +	else
> > +		/* The sink expects odd pixels through the first port */
> > +		ret = DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_ODD_EVEN_PIXELS;
> > +
> > +done:
> > +	of_node_put(ep1);
> > +	of_node_put(ep2);
> > +	of_node_put(parent_p1);
> > +	of_node_put(parent_p2);
> > +	of_node_put(remote_p1);
> > +	of_node_put(remote_p2);
> > +	return ret;
> 
> This is heavy, I would add blank lines to make the code easier to read.
> 
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_configuration);
> > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_bus_timings.h b/include/drm/drm_bus_timings.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..db8a385
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/drm/drm_bus_timings.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +#ifndef __DRM_BUS_TIMINGS__
> > +#define __DRM_BUS_TIMINGS__
> > +
> > +struct device_node;
> > +
> > +#define DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_EVEN_ODD_PIXELS	0
> > +#define DRM_LVDS_DUAL_LINK_ODD_EVEN_PIXELS	1
> 
> These should be documented with kerneldoc. How about also turning them
> into an enum ?
> 
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > +int drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_configuration(const struct device_node *p1,
> > +					    const struct device_node *p2);
> > +#else
> > +int drm_of_lvds_get_dual_link_configuration(const struct device_node *p1,
> > +					    const struct device_node *p2)
> > +{
> > +	return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#endif /* __DRM_BUS_TIMINGS__ */
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Laurent Pinchart

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

Powered by blists - more mailing lists