[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7529d921-0b12-d162-416d-3542933a0aed@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 03:22:59 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
airlied@...ux.ie, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, daniel@...ll.ch,
robdclark@...il.com, sean@...rly.run, vkoul@...nel.org
Cc: quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, quic_aravindh@...cinc.com,
quic_sbillaka@...cinc.com, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/msm/dp: stop event kernel thread when DP unbind
On 12/04/2022 03:21, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Kuogee Hsieh (2022-04-11 17:08:49)
>> Current DP driver implementation, event thread is kept running
>> after DP display is unbind. This patch fix this problem by disabling
>> DP irq and stop event thread to exit gracefully at dp_display_unbind().
>>
>> Fixes: e91e3065a806 ("drm/msm/dp: Add DP compliance tests on Snapdragon Chipsets")
>> Signed-off-by: Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>
>
> Should add a Reported-by tag from Dmitry here.
>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
>> index 01453db..fa1ef8e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c
>> @@ -273,6 +274,8 @@ static int dp_display_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
>> return rc;
>> }
>>
>> +static void dp_hpd_event_stop(struct dp_display_private *dp_priv);
>
> Why can't the function be defined here?
>
>> +
>> static void dp_display_unbind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
>> void *data)
>> {
>> @@ -280,6 +283,8 @@ static void dp_display_unbind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
>> struct drm_device *drm = dev_get_drvdata(master);
>> struct msm_drm_private *priv = drm->dev_private;
>>
>> + disable_irq(dp->irq);
>> + dp_hpd_event_stop(dp);
>> dp_power_client_deinit(dp->power);
>> dp_aux_unregister(dp->aux);
>> priv->dp[dp->id] = NULL;
>> @@ -1054,7 +1059,7 @@ static int hpd_event_thread(void *data)
>>
>> dp_priv = (struct dp_display_private *)data;
>>
>> - while (1) {
>> + while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
>> if (timeout_mode) {
>> wait_event_timeout(dp_priv->event_q,
>> (dp_priv->event_pndx == dp_priv->event_gndx),
>> @@ -1137,7 +1142,22 @@ static void dp_hpd_event_setup(struct dp_display_private *dp_priv)
>> init_waitqueue_head(&dp_priv->event_q);
>> spin_lock_init(&dp_priv->event_lock);
>>
>> - kthread_run(hpd_event_thread, dp_priv, "dp_hpd_handler");
>> + dp_priv->ev_tsk = kthread_run(hpd_event_thread, dp_priv, "dp_hpd_handler");
>> +
>> + if (IS_ERR(dp_priv->ev_tsk))
>> + DRM_ERROR("failed to create DP event thread\n");
>
> Why can't we error out? Why can't this kthread be started in probe?
Just my 2c. I don't think starting it in probe is a good idea. The
driver uses components, so, in my opinion, the thread should be started
from bind and stopped in unbind.
>
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void dp_hpd_event_stop(struct dp_display_private *dp_priv)
>> +{
>> + if (IS_ERR(dp_priv->ev_tsk))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + kthread_stop(dp_priv->ev_tsk);
>> +
>> + /* reset event q to empty */
>> + dp_priv->event_gndx = 0;
>> + dp_priv->event_pndx = 0;
>> }
>>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists