[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211005152326.5k5cb53ajqnactrg@SoMainline.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 17:23:26 +0200
From: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc: phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
Martin Botka <martin.botka@...ainline.org>,
Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@...ainline.org>,
Pavel Dubrova <pashadubrova@...il.com>,
Kiran Gunda <kgunda@...eaurora.org>,
Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@...ymobile.com>,
Bryan Wu <cooloney@...il.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] backlight: qcom-wled: Fix off-by-one maximum with
default num_strings
On 2021-10-05 15:03:49, Daniel Thompson wrote:
[..]
> > I much prefer doing that instead of trying to wrangle enumeration
> > parsing around integer values that are supposed to be used as-is. After
> > all this variable is already named to set the `+ 1` override currently,
> > and `qcom,enabled_strings` has "custom" handling as well. I'll extend
> > the validation to ensure num_strings>=1 too.
>
> Great.
>
>
> > In addition, and this needs some investigation on the dt-bindings side
> > too, it might be beneficial to make both properties mutually exclusive.
> > When specifying qcom,enabled_strings it makes little sense to also
> > provide qcom,num_strings and we want the former to take precedence.
>
> If we are designing a "fix" for that then my view is that if both are
> passed then num-strings should take precedence because it is an
> explicit statement about the number of strings where enabled_strings
> is implicit. In other words, if num-strings <= len(enabled_strings) then
> we should do what we are told, otherwise report error.
IMO both should be identical (num-strings == len(enabled-strings)) to
avoid ambiguity, but do read on.
> > At that point one might ask why qcom,num_strings remains at all when
> > DT can use qcom,enabled_strings instead. We will supposedly have to
> > keep backwards compatibility with DTs in mind so none of this can be
> > removed or made mutually exclusive from a driver standpoint, that all
> > has to be done in dt-bindings yaml to be enforced on checked-in DTs.
>
> So... perhaps I made a make offering a Reviewed-by: to a patch
> that allows len(enabled-strings) to have precedence. If anything
> currently uses enabled-strings then it *will* be 4 cells long and
> is relying on num-strings to ensure the right things happens ;-) .
Unfortunately Konrad (one of my team members) landed such a patch at the
beginning of this year because I failed to submit this patchset in time
while it has been sitting in my queue since 2019 after being used in a
downstream project. This is in pmi8994 which doesn't have anything
widely used / production ready yet, so I'd prefer to fix the DT instead
and remove / fix his comment:
/* Yes, all four strings *have to* be defined or things won't work. */
But this is mostly because, prior to this patchset, no default was set
for WLED4 so the 0'th string would get enabled num-strings (3 in
pmi8994's case) times.
Aside that there's only one more PMIC (also being worked on by
SoMainline) that sets qcom,enabled-strings: this is pm660l, pulled from
our local tree, and it actually has enabled-strings of length 2 which is
broken in its current form, exactly because of relying on this patchset.
Finally, we already discussed this inside SoMainline and the
number/enabled leds should most likely be moved out of the PMIC dtsi's
as they're probably panel, hence board or even device dependent.
> We'd like that case to keep working so we must allow num-strings to have
> precedence. In other words, when you add the new code, please put it at
> the end of the function!
Since there don't seem to be any substantial platforms/PMICs using this
functionality in a working manner, can I talk you into agreeing with
fixing the DT instead?
PS. In -next pmi8994_wled is only enabled for sony-xperia-tone, and
pm660l_wled has yet to be enabled by anything.
- Marijn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists