diff mbox

[19/20] OMAPDSS: DISPC: remove dssdev depependency from error handler

Message ID 1351070951-18616-20-git-send-email-tomi.valkeinen@ti.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Tomi Valkeinen Oct. 24, 2012, 9:29 a.m. UTC
The dispc error handler tries to "fix" issues by disabling and enabling
panel. This is problematic, as we're trying to remove the dependency
from omapdss to the omap_dss_devices. It's also racy, and doesn't really
fix anything.

This patch removes the use of omap_dss_device from the error handler,
and just disables and enables the associated overlay manager. This
should produce similar results as the previous solution, without using
dssdev.

However, the error handling is still horrible. But the problem boils
down to one question, to which I don't have a clear answer: what to do
when a HW error happens?

Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
---
 drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c |   19 ++++---------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

Comments

archit taneja Oct. 29, 2012, 7:12 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi,

On Wednesday 24 October 2012 02:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> The dispc error handler tries to "fix" issues by disabling and enabling
> panel. This is problematic, as we're trying to remove the dependency
> from omapdss to the omap_dss_devices. It's also racy, and doesn't really
> fix anything.
>
> This patch removes the use of omap_dss_device from the error handler,
> and just disables and enables the associated overlay manager. This
> should produce similar results as the previous solution, without using
> dssdev.

Calling APPLY functions from the DISPC driver seems a bit incorrect. 
Instead of disabling/enabling the panel, can't we disable/enable the 
manger by just using DISPC funcs?

Archit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tomi Valkeinen Oct. 29, 2012, 8:04 a.m. UTC | #2
On 2012-10-29 09:12, Archit Taneja wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wednesday 24 October 2012 02:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> The dispc error handler tries to "fix" issues by disabling and enabling
>> panel. This is problematic, as we're trying to remove the dependency
>> from omapdss to the omap_dss_devices. It's also racy, and doesn't really
>> fix anything.
>>
>> This patch removes the use of omap_dss_device from the error handler,
>> and just disables and enables the associated overlay manager. This
>> should produce similar results as the previous solution, without using
>> dssdev.
> 
> Calling APPLY functions from the DISPC driver seems a bit incorrect.
> Instead of disabling/enabling the panel, can't we disable/enable the
> manger by just using DISPC funcs?

I agree, but if we don't call apply functions, we're bypassing the
locks/etc from apply, and we could end up messing up what apply.c thinks
is going on.

With my omapdss+omapdrm compatibility patch series I'm moving the error
handler to the apply mechanism, so it becomes a bit saner.

 Tomi
archit taneja Oct. 29, 2012, 10:18 a.m. UTC | #3
On Monday 29 October 2012 01:34 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 2012-10-29 09:12, Archit Taneja wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wednesday 24 October 2012 02:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> The dispc error handler tries to "fix" issues by disabling and enabling
>>> panel. This is problematic, as we're trying to remove the dependency
>>> from omapdss to the omap_dss_devices. It's also racy, and doesn't really
>>> fix anything.
>>>
>>> This patch removes the use of omap_dss_device from the error handler,
>>> and just disables and enables the associated overlay manager. This
>>> should produce similar results as the previous solution, without using
>>> dssdev.
>>
>> Calling APPLY functions from the DISPC driver seems a bit incorrect.
>> Instead of disabling/enabling the panel, can't we disable/enable the
>> manger by just using DISPC funcs?
>
> I agree, but if we don't call apply functions, we're bypassing the
> locks/etc from apply, and we could end up messing up what apply.c thinks
> is going on.
>
> With my omapdss+omapdrm compatibility patch series I'm moving the error
> handler to the apply mechanism, so it becomes a bit saner.

Okay. Having the error handler in apply would make things better.

Archit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
index 070ce30..61b48ca 100644
--- a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
+++ b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
@@ -3902,15 +3902,12 @@  static void dispc_error_worker(struct work_struct *work)
 
 		if (bit & errors) {
 			int j;
-			struct omap_dss_device *dssdev = mgr->get_device(mgr);
-			bool enable;
 
 			DSSERR("SYNC_LOST on channel %s, restarting the output "
 					"with video overlays disabled\n",
 					mgr->name);
 
-			enable = dssdev->state == OMAP_DSS_DISPLAY_ACTIVE;
-			dssdev->driver->disable(dssdev);
+			dss_mgr_disable(mgr);
 
 			for (j = 0; j < omap_dss_get_num_overlays(); ++j) {
 				struct omap_overlay *ovl;
@@ -3918,14 +3915,10 @@  static void dispc_error_worker(struct work_struct *work)
 
 				if (ovl->id != OMAP_DSS_GFX &&
 						ovl->manager == mgr)
-					dispc_ovl_enable(ovl->id, false);
+					dss_ovl_disable(ovl);
 			}
 
-			dispc_mgr_go(mgr->id);
-			msleep(50);
-
-			if (enable)
-				dssdev->driver->enable(dssdev);
+			dss_mgr_enable(mgr);
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -3933,13 +3926,9 @@  static void dispc_error_worker(struct work_struct *work)
 		DSSERR("OCP_ERR\n");
 		for (i = 0; i < omap_dss_get_num_overlay_managers(); ++i) {
 			struct omap_overlay_manager *mgr;
-			struct omap_dss_device *dssdev;
 
 			mgr = omap_dss_get_overlay_manager(i);
-			dssdev = mgr->get_device(mgr);
-
-			if (dssdev && dssdev->driver)
-				dssdev->driver->disable(dssdev);
+			dss_mgr_disable(mgr);
 		}
 	}