Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 20 Aug 2021 18:49:06 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
To:     "a.hajda" <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Cc:     Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
        Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
        Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] drm/bridge: Make panel and bridge probe order
 consistent
Message-ID: <20210820164906.3xfxy43udc7hxflj@gilmour>
References: <20210728133229.2247965-1-maxime@cerno.tech>
 <CGME20210804140941eucas1p2d4d4ec491074530c714797523aec05ea@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <cc638e20-aa7c-7014-f70b-1bb68e629d87@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sbpyoycfgn424k53"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cc638e20-aa7c-7014-f70b-1bb68e629d87@samsung.com>
Precedence: bulk


--sbpyoycfgn424k53
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Andrzej,

On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 04:09:38PM +0200, a.hajda wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
>=20
> I have been busy with other tasks, and I did not follow the list last=20
> time, so sorry for my late response.
>=20
> On 28.07.2021 15:32, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >=20
> > We've encountered an issue with the RaspberryPi DSI panel that prevente=
d the
> > whole display driver from probing.
> >=20
> > The issue is described in detail in the commit 7213246a803f ("drm/vc4: =
dsi:
> > Only register our component once a DSI device is attached"), but the ba=
sic idea
> > is that since the panel is probed through i2c, there's no synchronizati=
on
> > between its probe and the registration of the MIPI-DSI host it's attach=
ed to.
> >=20
> > We initially moved the component framework registration to the MIPI-DSI=
 Host
> > attach hook to make sure we register our component only when we have a =
DSI
> > device attached to our MIPI-DSI host, and then use lookup our DSI devic=
e in our
> > bind hook.
> >=20
> > However, all the DSI bridges controlled through i2c are only registerin=
g their
> > associated DSI device in their bridge attach hook, meaning with our cha=
nge
>=20
> I guess this is incorrect. I have promoted several times the pattern=20
> that device driver shouldn't expose its interfaces (for example=20
> component_add, drm_panel_add, drm_bridge_add) until it gathers all=20
> required dependencies. In this particular case bridges should defer=20
> probe until DSI bus becomes available. I guess this way the patch you=20
> reverts would work.
>=20
> I advised few times this pattern in case of DSI hosts, apparently I=20
> didn't notice the similar issue can appear in case of bridges. Or there=
=20
> is something I have missed???
>=20
> Anyway there are already eleven(?) bridge drivers using this pattern. I=
=20
> wonder if fixing it would be difficult, or if it expose other issues???
> The patches should be quite straightforward - move=20
> of_find_mipi_dsi_host_by_node and mipi_dsi_device_register_full to probe=
=20
> time.

I gave this a try today, went back to the current upstream code and
found that indeed it works. I converted two bridges that works now. I'll
send a new version some time next week and will convert all the others
if we agree on the approach.

Thanks for the suggestion!

> Finally I think that if we will not fix these bridge drivers we will=20
> encounter another set of issues with new platforms connecting "DSI host=
=20
> drivers assuming this pattern" and "i2c/dsi device drivers assuming=20
> pattern already present in the bridges".

Yeah, this is exactly the situation I'm in :)

Maxime

--sbpyoycfgn424k53
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRcEzekXsqa64kGDp7j7w1vZxhRxQUCYR/dAgAKCRDj7w1vZxhR
xYyIAP9QJYMcMeJKGOWtfkVHWa6UcWUgQjWFK6FrcjkrrWVtxwD/a8rMGvXmVVJq
OoGA9td4D3UANC1W0k+LCikxHGQpvwQ=
=E8Tv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--sbpyoycfgn424k53--