Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp2171122yba; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:48:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzcGMKMVfimruMHkEU0T6YSdZv26h9RX24CLxVr4pepXSfu6F2mIT4wrqBnOI2DNGjIBelX X-Received: by 2002:a63:ed4f:: with SMTP id m15mr39743998pgk.387.1556218106440; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:48:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1556218106; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=vqA8ebzpKn4KfTCvBG79i9oNMxKKcYgRLKiQXZfi8mSzzQYaZBpQNeKoM3FMW0nVsV hh4F+g5Y3/TCRQMoQDX8f4TcFP2hgq30XlnwISMUPTLhl69S4qqqUVDDeNK1JUbd5/3D SME4F2/JSNI3+1iJDgi/Q5HgGju40BHHhNE+QYsxa8KuO560U4nM3sEzLkz994JOZC50 TPnKGW3wB27ImGSFKYR/HYq0BOiP7P0ZRhmOVsWjs/c7HrpwUzsYvseItPR0YfKZHRSm UhiuZkKJhyme12UuyQbESoGg8vUkDZ3rF1mIf5GXQruJfnoWPFBr5tKxDcDK6bi/WiiC IzxQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=IN6NaqLFdAYK0WHvc80Cq+pA+MV6OzqMH2tbDLc006M=; b=iptG4T+JKekvj69q2Qo3B1jy8UUKLtAicH3HMUL9zlf94AiU03SdSkp+8adP92DLbg SrnwytStF7nOH1NBbjqDuLPZ8DKt5jXUKmwESGZrdYXipiNQ/jFnWXrM7Zugi9lhq9C4 NA2qfh+hcukDTmIVooWY8jpORgr16eaxzLqsmOpYz1PHPs6ABs7xljrJLdoj/iOqnif0 MvAThnbnOgwP1EBxTGNvHqywPZ3h/nlIakLfxgj0l5jR66Ip7GIAozKykMs3s9S5UOEw /DHTqliSzyNUyrfiR3u9/JfmNpOGhoxUwNgzloam8Q+tLhws0XtYXD7bCBvt7waiJMfO NFWg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.s=mail header.b=Z0goq+VW; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j25si22306005pgb.531.2019.04.25.11.48.10; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:48:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.s=mail header.b=Z0goq+VW; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728999AbfDYSDF (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:03:05 -0400 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([213.167.242.64]:38460 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728005AbfDYSDF (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:03:05 -0400 Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (net-37-182-44-227.cust.vodafonedsl.it [37.182.44.227]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9382A5F; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 20:03:02 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1556215382; bh=GWgzd2FlAok889v50TdSHG8rqIenxkBS4jYH9ayUm9g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Z0goq+VWJ+2/MHScWEnhTwQ7fMl28WcYfKcVJJnoq3hZc4c30gHqRJA1py4kVI9vA GqkmgwAv5kVsjK1GSg3Hl4UNtT5R6Xy5W0aKeXRLqHTB2PX5AXJdg271wwtrJGXMvR OSMR+dQ3cw7m7aCnkPL5vi6DiTCbsbfXzZTkGRmU= Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:02:51 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Matt Redfearn Cc: Andrzej Hajda , Philippe Cornu , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" , Matthew Redfearn , Nickey Yang , Heiko Stuebner , Archit Taneja , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/bridge/synopsys: dsi: Don't blindly call post_disable Message-ID: <20190425180251.GC12024@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20190424142148.25927-1-matt.redfearn@thinci.com> <3da4c0a3-a77b-5128-63f7-9c8d6b012c68@samsung.com> <95c36782-7eaf-2224-bb52-cff0a53d98d8@thinci.com> <20190425175915.GB12024@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190425175915.GB12024@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 08:59:15PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:39:27PM +0000, Matt Redfearn wrote: > > On 25/04/2019 13:13, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > >> On 24.04.2019 16:22, Matt Redfearn wrote: > >>> The DRM documentation states that post_disable is an optional callback. > >>> As such an implementing device may not populate it. To avoid panicing > >>> the kernel by calling a NULL function pointer, we should NULL check it > >>> before blindy calling it. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Matt Redfearn > >> > >>> --- > >>> > >>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 3 ++- > >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c > >>> index 38e88071363..0ee440216b8 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c > >>> @@ -805,7 +805,8 @@ static void dw_mipi_dsi_bridge_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge) > >>> * This needs to be fixed in the drm_bridge framework and the API > >>> * needs to be updated to manage our own call chains... > >>> */ > >>> - dsi->panel_bridge->funcs->post_disable(dsi->panel_bridge); > >>> + if (dsi->panel_bridge->funcs->post_disable) > >>> + dsi->panel_bridge->funcs->post_disable(dsi->panel_bridge); > >>> > >> > >> Why not drm_bridge_post_disable ? > > > > Ah - that seems like a nicer fix! Do you think the comment above > > describing why this function pointer is called directly can be removed > > as well if we go this route? > > It shouldn't be necessary to call ->post_disable manually here as the > bridge core handles it internally. This is a hack to work around a > problem, and should be fixed properly. > > > If someone calls drm_bridge_post_disable() on the Synposys DSI > > drm_bridge it will go on to call post_disable on all other bridges in > > the chain, in addition to us calling them here. Is it an issue to call > > it multiple times? > > It depends on the panel implementation, but in general it's not a good > idea. It may happen to work, but could break at any time in the future. Double-checking the driver, the .attach() operation doesn't propagate to the next bridge, so the bridge core will not know about it, and will not propagate .post_disable() either. I think this should be fixed in a way that uses the drm bridge core infrastructure. > >>> if (dsi->slave) { > >>> dw_mipi_dsi_disable(dsi->slave); -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart