[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <7ZILAR.B5RI26D3L60Y1@crapouillou.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:54:43 +0100
From: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
To: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
Subject: Re: drm: of: Improve error handling in bridge/panel detection
Hi Paul,
Le jeu., avril 7 2022 at 11:34:08 +0200, Paul Kocialkowski
<paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com> a écrit :
> With the previous rework of drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge only
> -EPROBE_DEFER is returned while previous behavior allowed -ENODEV
> to be returned when the port/endpoint is either missing or
> unavailable.
>
> Make the default return code of the function -ENODEV to handle this
> and
> only return -EPROBE_DEFER in find_panel_or_bridge when the of device
> is
> available but not yet registered. Also return the error code whenever
> the remote node exists to avoid checking for child nodes.
>
> Checking child nodes could result in -EPROBE_DEFER returned by
> find_panel_or_bridge with an unrelated child node that would overwrite
> a legitimate -ENODEV from find_panel_or_bridge if the remote node from
> the of graph is unavailable. This happens because find_panel_or_bridge
> has no way to distinguish between a legitimate panel/bridge node that
> isn't yet registered and an unrelated node.
>
> Add comments around to clarify this behavior.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>
> Fixes: 67bae5f28c89 ("drm: of: Properly try all possible cases for
> bridge/panel detection")
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
This fixes the ingenic-drm driver, which was broken by the commit this
patch addresses.
So:
Tested-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
Cheers,
-Paul
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> index 8716da6369a6..97ea9d2016ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_of.c
> @@ -223,6 +223,9 @@ static int find_panel_or_bridge(struct
> device_node *node,
> struct drm_panel **panel,
> struct drm_bridge **bridge)
> {
> + if (!of_device_is_available(node))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> if (panel) {
> *panel = of_drm_find_panel(node);
> if (!IS_ERR(*panel))
> @@ -265,7 +268,7 @@ int drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(const struct
> device_node *np,
> struct drm_bridge **bridge)
> {
> struct device_node *node;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = -ENODEV;
>
> if (!panel && !bridge)
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -282,8 +285,12 @@ int drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(const struct
> device_node *np,
> ret = find_panel_or_bridge(node, panel, bridge);
> of_node_put(node);
>
> - if (!ret)
> - return 0;
> + /*
> + * If the graph/remote node is present we consider it
> + * to be the legitimate candidate here and return
> + * whatever code we got from find_panel_or_bridge.
> + */
> + return ret;
> }
> }
>
> @@ -296,12 +303,18 @@ int drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(const struct
> device_node *np,
> ret = find_panel_or_bridge(node, panel, bridge);
> of_node_put(node);
>
> - /* Stop at the first found occurrence. */
> + /*
> + * Note that an unrelated (available) child node will cause
> + * find_panel_or_bridge to return -EPROBE_DEFER because there
> + * is no way to distinguish the node from a legitimate
> + * panel/bridge that didn't register yet. Keep iterating nodes
> + * and only return on the first found occurrence.
> + */
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
> }
>
> - return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists