linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 08/26] drm/bridge: panel: add a panel

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <iucfx6tewwazxnonivajmdqqaexdfn6izwxwlv2l5t3256uwfy@sp4cm5eifdt3>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 04:49:21 +0200
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
Cc: Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Inki Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>, 
	Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, 
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, 
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, 
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Daniel Thompson <danielt@...nel.org>, 
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>, 
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>, Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, 
	Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com>, 
	Paul Kocialkowski <contact@...lk.fr>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, 
	Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Robert Foss <rfoss@...nel.org>, 
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>, 
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, 
	Hervé Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/26] drm/bridge: panel: add a panel_bridge to every
 panel

On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 07:14:23PM +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> Adding a panel does currently not add a panel_bridge wrapping it. Usually
> the panel_bridge creation happens when some other driver (e.g. the previous
> bridge or the encoder) calls *_of_get_bridge() and the following element in
> the pipeline is a panel.
> 
> This has some drawbacks:
> 
>  * the panel_bridge is not created in the context of the driver of the
>    underlying physical device (the panel driver), but of some other driver
>  * that "other driver" is not aware of whether the returned drm_bridge
>    pointer is a panel_bridge created on the fly, a pre-existing
>    panel_bridge or a non-panel bridge
>  * removal of a panel_bridge requires calling drm_panel_bridge_remove(),
>    but the "other driver" doesn't know whether this is needed because it
>    doesn't know whether it has created a panel_bridge or not
> 
> So far this approach has been working because devm and drmm ensure the
> panel bridge would be dealloacted at some later point. However with the
> upcoming implementation of dynamic bridge lifetime this will get more
> complicated.
> 
> Correct removal of a panel_bridge might possibly be obtained by adding more
> devm/drmm technology to have it freed correctly at all times. However this
> would add more complexity and not help making lifetime more understandable.
> 
> Use a different approach instead: always create a panel_bridge with a
> drm_panel, thus matching the lifetime of the drm_panel and the panel_bridge
> wrapping it. This makes lifetime much more straightforward to understand
> and to further develop on.
> 
> With the panel_bridge always created, the functions to get a bridge
> [devm_drm_of_get_bridge() and drmm_of_get_bridge()] become simpler because
> the bridge they are looking for exists already (if it can exist at all). In
> turn, this is implemented based on a variant of
> drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge() that only looks for panels:
> of_drm_find_bridge_by_endpoint(). In the future
> drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge() can be progressively removed because there
> will never be a panel not exposing a bridge.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
> 
> ---
> 
> This patch was added in v6.
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  include/drm/drm_panel.h        |  8 +++++
>  2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 

LGTM, minor issue below.

> @@ -1018,6 +1067,11 @@ struct drm_bridge *devm_drm_panel_bridge_add_typed(struct device *dev,
>  {
>  	struct drm_bridge **ptr, *bridge;
>  
> +	if (panel->bridge) {
> +		DRM_DEBUG("panel %s: returning existing bridge=%p", dev_name(dev), panel->bridge);
> +		return panel->bridge;
> +	}

Shouldn't the rest of the function also be removed as you do in other
cases?

> +
>  	ptr = devres_alloc(devm_drm_panel_bridge_release, sizeof(*ptr),
>  			   GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!ptr)

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry