Hi Ville,
On 10-05-2017 14:41, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:00:13PM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> Introduce a new helper function which calls mode_valid() callback
>> for all bridges in an encoder chain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jose Abreu <joabreu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Carlos Palminha <palminha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Archit Taneja <architt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/drm/drm_bridge.h | 2 ++
>> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
>> index 86a7637..dc8cdfe 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
>> @@ -206,6 +206,39 @@ bool drm_bridge_mode_fixup(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_bridge_mode_fixup);
>>
>> /**
>> + * drm_bridge_mode_valid - validate the mode against all bridges in the
>> + * encoder chain.
>> + * @bridge: bridge control structure
>> + * @mode: desired mode to be validated
>> + *
>> + * Calls &drm_bridge_funcs.mode_valid for all the bridges in the encoder
>> + * chain, starting from the first bridge to the last. If at least one bridge
>> + * does not accept the mode the function returns the error code.
>> + *
>> + * Note: the bridge passed should be the one closest to the encoder.
>> + *
>> + * RETURNS:
>> + * MODE_OK on success, drm_mode_status Enum error code on failure
>> + */
>> +enum drm_mode_status drm_bridge_mode_valid(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> + const struct drm_display_mode *mode)
>> +{
>> + enum drm_mode_status ret = MODE_OK;
>> +
>> + if (!bridge)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + if (bridge->funcs->mode_valid)
>> + ret = bridge->funcs->mode_valid(bridge, mode);
>> +
>> + if (ret != MODE_OK)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + return drm_bridge_mode_valid(bridge->next, mode);
> Looks like it should be pretty trivial to avoid the recursion.
>
> Am I correct in interpreting this that bridges have some kind of
> a hand rolled linked list implementation? Reusing the standard
> linked lists would allow you to use list_for_each() etc.
I reused the drm_bridge_mode_fixup but now I see how its done
like that: so that the fixup is propagated in the correct order.
As for mode_valid we just need to check if ret != MODE_OK then I
think we can use the list_for_each_entry(bridge->list).
Best regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu
>
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_bridge_mode_valid);
>> +
>> +/**
>> * drm_bridge_disable - disables all bridges in the encoder chain
>> * @bridge: bridge control structure
>> *
>> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_bridge.h b/include/drm/drm_bridge.h
>> index 00c6c36..8358eb3 100644
>> --- a/include/drm/drm_bridge.h
>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_bridge.h
>> @@ -233,6 +233,8 @@ int drm_bridge_attach(struct drm_encoder *encoder, struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> bool drm_bridge_mode_fixup(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> const struct drm_display_mode *mode,
>> struct drm_display_mode *adjusted_mode);
>> +enum drm_mode_status drm_bridge_mode_valid(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> + const struct drm_display_mode *mode);
>> void drm_bridge_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge);
>> void drm_bridge_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge);
>> void drm_bridge_mode_set(struct drm_bridge *bridge,
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
