| Message ID | 20240122163220.110788-4-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/bridge: Allow using fwnode API to get the next bridge | expand |
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, > meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. > > Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) > return NULL; > } > > +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, > + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) > +{ > + struct drm_bridge *bridge; > + struct fwnode_handle *ep; > + struct fwnode_handle *remote; > + > + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); > + if (!ep) { > + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); > + fwnode_handle_put(ep); > + if (!remote) { > + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); > + return -ENODEV; > + } > + > + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); > + fwnode_handle_put(remote); > + > + if (!bridge) { > + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > + return -EPROBE_DEFER; > + } > + > + *next_bridge = bridge; > + > + return 0; > +} > + Hmmmm yes, this convinces me further that we should switch to fwnode, not implement fwnode and OF side-by-side. > static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > struct simple_bridge *sbridge; > @@ -199,14 +232,17 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > else > sbridge->info = simple_bridge_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); > > - /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > - if (!remote) > - return -EINVAL; > - > - sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > - of_node_put(remote); > + if (pdev->dev.of_node) { > + /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > + if (!remote) > + return -EINVAL; > > + sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > + of_node_put(remote); > + } else { > + simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(&pdev->dev, &sbridge->next_bridge); > + } > if (!sbridge->next_bridge) { > dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > return -EPROBE_DEFER; > @@ -231,6 +267,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > /* Register the bridge. */ > sbridge->bridge.funcs = &simple_bridge_bridge_funcs; > sbridge->bridge.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; > + sbridge->bridge.fwnode = pdev->dev.fwnode; > sbridge->bridge.timings = sbridge->info->timings; > > drm_bridge_add(&sbridge->bridge); > -- > 2.25.1 >
Hi, On 2024/1/23 09:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: >> Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, >> meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c >> index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c >> @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) >> return NULL; >> } >> >> +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, >> + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) >> +{ >> + struct drm_bridge *bridge; >> + struct fwnode_handle *ep; >> + struct fwnode_handle *remote; >> + >> + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); >> + if (!ep) { >> + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); >> + fwnode_handle_put(ep); >> + if (!remote) { >> + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); >> + fwnode_handle_put(remote); >> + >> + if (!bridge) { >> + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); >> + return -EPROBE_DEFER; >> + } >> + >> + *next_bridge = bridge; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + > Hmmmm yes, this convinces me further that we should switch to fwnode, > not implement fwnode and OF side-by-side. > OK, I'm agree with you. But this means that I have to make the drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode() function works on both DT systems and non-DT systems. This is also means that we will no longer need to call of_drm_find_bridge() function anymore. This will eventually lead to completely remove of_drm_find_bridge()? As far as I can see, if I follow you suggestion, drm/bridge subsystem will encountering a *big* refactor. My 'side-by-side' approach allows co-exist. It is not really meant to purge OF. I feel it is a little bit of aggressive. hello Maxime, are you watching this? what do you think? >> static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> { >> struct simple_bridge *sbridge; >> @@ -199,14 +232,17 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> else >> sbridge->info = simple_bridge_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); >> >> - /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ >> - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); >> - if (!remote) >> - return -EINVAL; >> - >> - sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); >> - of_node_put(remote); >> + if (pdev->dev.of_node) { >> + /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ >> + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); >> + if (!remote) >> + return -EINVAL; >> >> + sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); >> + of_node_put(remote); >> + } else { >> + simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(&pdev->dev, &sbridge->next_bridge); >> + } >> if (!sbridge->next_bridge) { >> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); >> return -EPROBE_DEFER; >> @@ -231,6 +267,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> /* Register the bridge. */ >> sbridge->bridge.funcs = &simple_bridge_bridge_funcs; >> sbridge->bridge.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; >> + sbridge->bridge.fwnode = pdev->dev.fwnode; >> sbridge->bridge.timings = sbridge->info->timings; >> >> drm_bridge_add(&sbridge->bridge); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >>
Hello Sui, On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 08:18:22PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > On 2024/1/23 09:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > >> Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, > >> meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> > >> --- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- > >> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > >> index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > >> @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) > >> return NULL; > >> } > >> > >> +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, > >> + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) > >> +{ > >> + struct drm_bridge *bridge; > >> + struct fwnode_handle *ep; > >> + struct fwnode_handle *remote; > >> + > >> + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); > >> + if (!ep) { > >> + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> + } > >> + > >> + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); > >> + fwnode_handle_put(ep); > >> + if (!remote) { > >> + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); > >> + return -ENODEV; > >> + } > >> + > >> + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); > >> + fwnode_handle_put(remote); > >> + > >> + if (!bridge) { > >> + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > >> + return -EPROBE_DEFER; > >> + } > >> + > >> + *next_bridge = bridge; > >> + > >> + return 0; > >> +} > >> + > > > > Hmmmm yes, this convinces me further that we should switch to fwnode, > > not implement fwnode and OF side-by-side. > > OK, I'm agree with you. > > But this means that I have to make the drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode() function works > on both DT systems and non-DT systems. This is also means that we will no longer > need to call of_drm_find_bridge() function anymore. This will eventually lead to > completely remove of_drm_find_bridge()? It would be replaced by fwnode_drm_find_bridge(). Although, if we need to rename the function, I think it would be best to make have a drm_ prefix, maybe drm_bridge_find-by_fwnode() or something similar. > As far as I can see, if I follow you suggestion, drm/bridge subsystem will > encountering a *big* refactor. My 'side-by-side' approach allows co-exist. > It is not really meant to purge OF. I feel it is a little bit of aggressive. > > hello Maxime, are you watching this? what do you think? > > >> static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> { > >> struct simple_bridge *sbridge; > >> @@ -199,14 +232,17 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> else > >> sbridge->info = simple_bridge_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); > >> > >> - /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > >> - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > >> - if (!remote) > >> - return -EINVAL; > >> - > >> - sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > >> - of_node_put(remote); > >> + if (pdev->dev.of_node) { > >> + /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > >> + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > >> + if (!remote) > >> + return -EINVAL; > >> > >> + sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > >> + of_node_put(remote); > >> + } else { > >> + simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(&pdev->dev, &sbridge->next_bridge); > >> + } > >> if (!sbridge->next_bridge) { > >> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > >> return -EPROBE_DEFER; > >> @@ -231,6 +267,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> /* Register the bridge. */ > >> sbridge->bridge.funcs = &simple_bridge_bridge_funcs; > >> sbridge->bridge.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; > >> + sbridge->bridge.fwnode = pdev->dev.fwnode; > >> sbridge->bridge.timings = sbridge->info->timings; > >> > >> drm_bridge_add(&sbridge->bridge);
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 08:18:22PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > Hi, > > > On 2024/1/23 09:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > > > Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, > > > meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > > index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > > @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) > > > return NULL; > > > } > > > +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, > > > + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) > > > +{ > > > + struct drm_bridge *bridge; > > > + struct fwnode_handle *ep; > > > + struct fwnode_handle *remote; > > > + > > > + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); > > > + if (!ep) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + } > > > + > > > + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); > > > + fwnode_handle_put(ep); > > > + if (!remote) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > + } > > > + > > > + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); > > > + fwnode_handle_put(remote); > > > + > > > + if (!bridge) { > > > + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > > > + return -EPROBE_DEFER; > > > + } > > > + > > > + *next_bridge = bridge; > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > Hmmmm yes, this convinces me further that we should switch to fwnode, > > not implement fwnode and OF side-by-side. > > > > OK, I'm agree with you. > > > But this means that I have to make the drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode() function works > on both DT systems and non-DT systems. This is also means that we will no longer > need to call of_drm_find_bridge() function anymore. This will eventually lead to > completely remove of_drm_find_bridge()? > > > As far as I can see, if I follow you suggestion, drm/bridge subsystem will > encountering a *big* refactor. My 'side-by-side' approach allows co-exist. > It is not really meant to purge OF. I feel it is a little bit of aggressive. > > hello Maxime, are you watching this? what do you think? It's indeed going to be a pretty big refactoring, but I agree with Laurent that we don't want to maintain both side by side. Maxime
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) return NULL; } +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) +{ + struct drm_bridge *bridge; + struct fwnode_handle *ep; + struct fwnode_handle *remote; + + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); + if (!ep) { + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); + return -EINVAL; + } + + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); + fwnode_handle_put(ep); + if (!remote) { + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); + fwnode_handle_put(remote); + + if (!bridge) { + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); + return -EPROBE_DEFER; + } + + *next_bridge = bridge; + + return 0; +} + static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { struct simple_bridge *sbridge; @@ -199,14 +232,17 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) else sbridge->info = simple_bridge_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); - /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); - if (!remote) - return -EINVAL; - - sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); - of_node_put(remote); + if (pdev->dev.of_node) { + /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); + if (!remote) + return -EINVAL; + sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); + of_node_put(remote); + } else { + simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(&pdev->dev, &sbridge->next_bridge); + } if (!sbridge->next_bridge) { dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); return -EPROBE_DEFER; @@ -231,6 +267,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) /* Register the bridge. */ sbridge->bridge.funcs = &simple_bridge_bridge_funcs; sbridge->bridge.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; + sbridge->bridge.fwnode = pdev->dev.fwnode; sbridge->bridge.timings = sbridge->info->timings; drm_bridge_add(&sbridge->bridge);
Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> --- drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)