Hi Ville,
On 10-05-2017 15:01, Jose Abreu wrote:
> 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).
Oops, I got this wrong sorry. I meant there is a list but its for
all the system bridges. This is a "custom" linked list yeah.
Best regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu
>
> 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
