| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CA+Px+wXNRw6aNgpfA8qRd1tw0Tx+0jSj-dG-9_wjmxNOsji7_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 17:32:33 +0800
From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...gle.com>
To: Yunfei Dong <Yunfei.Dong@...iatek.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...omium.org>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...omium.org>,
Tiffany Lin <tiffany.lin@...iatek.com>,
Andrew-CT Chen <andrew-ct.chen@...iatek.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...gle.com>,
Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
Fritz Koenig <frkoenig@...omium.org>,
Irui Wang <irui.wang@...iatek.com>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
srv_heupstream@...iatek.com, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3, 04/15] media: mtk-vcodec: Use component framework to
manage each hardware information
On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 06:10:40PM +0800, Yunfei Dong wrote:
> +static struct component_match *mtk_vcodec_match_add(
> + struct mtk_vcodec_dev *vdec_dev)
> + {
Remove the extra space before {.
> + struct platform_device *pdev = vdec_dev->plat_dev;
> + struct component_match *match = NULL;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(mtk_vdec_drv_ids); i++) {
> + struct device_node *comp_node;
> + enum mtk_vdec_hw_id comp_idx;
> + const struct of_device_id *of_id;
Failed to see benifits to declare here in the case. To be neat, move
the variable declaration to the beginning of function.
> +
> + comp_node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL,
> + mtk_vdec_drv_ids[i].compatible);
> + if (!comp_node)
> + continue;
If moving of_id assignment to the beginning of for-loop, use of_id->compatible.
> +
> + if (!of_device_is_available(comp_node)) {
> + of_node_put(comp_node);
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Fail to get MMSYS node\n");
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + of_id = &mtk_vdec_drv_ids[i];
> + if (!of_id) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get match node\n");
> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> + }
Move the block to the beginning of for-loop. Looking to other blocks
around, does it make more sense to use `continue` instead of `return`?
> +
> + comp_idx = (enum mtk_vdec_hw_id)of_id->data;
> + mtk_v4l2_debug(4, "Get component:hw_id(%d),vdec_dev(0x%p),comp_node(0x%p)\n",
> + comp_idx, vdec_dev, comp_node);
> + vdec_dev->component_node[comp_idx] = comp_node;
> +
> + component_match_add_release(&pdev->dev, &match, mtk_vdec_release_of,
> + mtk_vdec_compare_of, comp_node);
> + of_node_put(comp_node);
I thought it shouldn't call of_node_put(...) which is already
delegated to component framework (mtk_vdec_release_of).
> + }
> +
> + return match;
Fix the indent.
> +static int mtk_vcodec_init_dec_params(struct mtk_vcodec_dev *dev)
> +{
> + struct platform_device *pdev = dev->plat_dev;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = mtk_vcodec_get_reg_bases(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!dev->is_comp_supported) {
> + dev->dec_irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> + if (dev->dec_irq < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get irq number");
> + return dev->dec_irq;
> + }
> +
> + irq_set_status_flags(dev->dec_irq, IRQ_NOAUTOEN);
> + ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, dev->dec_irq,
> + mtk_vcodec_dec_irq_handler, 0, pdev->name, dev);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to install dev->dec_irq %d (%d)",
> + dev->dec_irq, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = mtk_vcodec_init_dec_pm(pdev, &dev->pm);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get mt vcodec clock source");
> + return ret;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
To be concise, return 0.
> + comp_node =
> + of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "mediatek,mtk-vcodec-core");
> + if (!comp_node)
> + dev->is_comp_supported = false;
> + else
> + dev->is_comp_supported = true;
> + of_node_put(comp_node);
Looking up "mediatek,mtk-vcodec-core" to determine if it uses
component framework sounds like a sub-optimal method.
> @@ -311,7 +429,6 @@ static int mtk_vcodec_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> MTK_VCODEC_DEC_NAME);
> video_set_drvdata(vfd_dec, dev);
> dev->vfd_dec = vfd_dec;
> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, dev);
>
> dev->m2m_dev_dec = v4l2_m2m_init(&mtk_vdec_m2m_ops);
> if (IS_ERR((__force void *)dev->m2m_dev_dec)) {
> @@ -362,8 +479,17 @@ static int mtk_vcodec_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> mtk_v4l2_debug(0, "decoder registered as /dev/video%d",
> vfd_dec->num);
>
> - return 0;
> + if (dev->is_comp_supported) {
> + ret = mtk_vcodec_init_master(dev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto err_component_match;
> + } else {
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, dev);
> + }
Has asked the same question in [1]. Why it removes the
platform_set_drvdata() above? mtk_vcodec_init_master() also calls
platform_set_drvdata().
[1]: https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/patch/20210707062157.21176-4-yunfei.dong@mediatek.com/
> + return 0;
> +err_component_match:
> + video_unregister_device(vfd_dec);
Why video_unregister_device()? It is already called [2].
[2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.14-rc3/source/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vcodec/mtk_vcodec_dec_drv.c#L344
> @@ -379,9 +505,8 @@ static int mtk_vcodec_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> err_dec_alloc:
> v4l2_device_unregister(&dev->v4l2_dev);
> err_res:
> - mtk_vcodec_release_dec_pm(&dev->pm);
Shouldn't remove it. mtk_vcodec_init_dec_params() also needs to undo
in the path.
Refactoring them to mtk_vcodec_init_dec_params() makes the error
handling more complicated.
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vcodec/mtk_vcodec_drv.h b/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vcodec/mtk_vcodec_drv.h
> index 973b0b3649c6..d6bb723db106 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vcodec/mtk_vcodec_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/mtk-vcodec/mtk_vcodec_drv.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@
> #include <media/videobuf2-core.h>
> #include "mtk_vcodec_util.h"
>
> +#define VDEC_HW_ACTIVE 0x10
> +#define VDEC_IRQ_CFG 0x11
> +#define VDEC_IRQ_CLR 0x10
> +#define VDEC_IRQ_CFG_REG 0xa4
If moving to mtk_vcodec_dec_hw.h or mtk_vcodec_dec_hw.c makes more sense?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists