On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 01:02:35PM +0200, Dariusz Marcinkiewicz wrote:
> Use the new cec_notifier_cec_adap_(un)register() functions to
> (un)register the notifier for the CEC adapter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dariusz Marcinkiewicz <darekm@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda9950.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda9950.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda9950.c
> index 8039fc0d83db4..a5a75bdeb7a5f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda9950.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda9950.c
> @@ -420,7 +420,8 @@ static int tda9950_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> priv->hdmi = glue->parent;
>
> priv->adap = cec_allocate_adapter(&tda9950_cec_ops, priv, "tda9950",
> - CEC_CAP_DEFAULTS,
> + CEC_CAP_DEFAULTS |
> + CEC_CAP_CONNECTOR_INFO,
> CEC_MAX_LOG_ADDRS);
> if (IS_ERR(priv->adap))
> return PTR_ERR(priv->adap);
> @@ -457,13 +458,14 @@ static int tda9950_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> - priv->notify = cec_notifier_get(priv->hdmi);
> + priv->notify = cec_notifier_cec_adap_register(priv->hdmi, NULL,
> + priv->adap);
> if (!priv->notify)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> ret = cec_register_adapter(priv->adap, priv->hdmi);
> if (ret < 0) {
> - cec_notifier_put(priv->notify);
> + cec_notifier_cec_adap_unregister(priv->notify);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -473,8 +475,6 @@ static int tda9950_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> */
> devm_remove_action(dev, tda9950_cec_del, priv);
>
> - cec_register_cec_notifier(priv->adap, priv->notify);
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -482,8 +482,8 @@ static int tda9950_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> {
> struct tda9950_priv *priv = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
>
> + cec_notifier_cec_adap_unregister(priv->notify);
> cec_unregister_adapter(priv->adap);
> - cec_notifier_put(priv->notify);
It looks weird to have an unexpectedly different ordering of
unregistration from the registration path - normally, unregistration
is the reverse order of initialisation.
In the initialisation path, it seems that we register the notifier
and _then_ the adapter. Here, we unregister the notifier and then
the adapter rather than what would normally be expected. Why is
this? I suspect there will be drivers created that do this the
"normal" way round, so if this is a requirement, it needs to be made
plainly obvious.
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.23.0.rc1.153.gdeed80330f-goog
>
>
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
