On 09/09, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:01 PM Melissa Wen <melissa.srw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > looks good to me, just a few things inline.
> >
> > On 09/04, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > This means we also need to slightly restructure the exit code, so that
> > > final cleanup of the drm_device is triggered by unregistering the
> > > platform device. Note that devres is both clean up when the driver is
> > > unbound (not the case for vgem, we don't bind), and also when unregistering
> > > the device (very much the case for vgem). Therefore we can rely on devres
> > > even though vgem isn't a proper platform device driver.
> > >
> > > This also somewhat untangles the load code, since the drm and platform device
> > > setup are no longer interleaved, but two distinct steps.
> > >
> > > v2: use devres_open/release_group so we can use devm without real
> > > hacks in the driver core or having to create an entire fake bus for
> > > testing drivers. Might want to extract this into helpers eventually,
> > > maybe as a mock_drm_dev_alloc or test_drm_dev_alloc.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/vgem/vgem_drv.c | 55 ++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vgem/vgem_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vgem/vgem_drv.c
> > > index 313339bbff90..f95537627463 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vgem/vgem_drv.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vgem/vgem_drv.c
> > > @@ -401,16 +401,8 @@ static int vgem_prime_mmap(struct drm_gem_object *obj,
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > -static void vgem_release(struct drm_device *dev)
> > > -{
> > > - struct vgem_device *vgem = container_of(dev, typeof(*vgem), drm);
> > > -
> > > - platform_device_unregister(vgem->platform);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > static struct drm_driver vgem_driver = {
> > > .driver_features = DRIVER_GEM | DRIVER_RENDER,
> > > - .release = vgem_release,
> > > .open = vgem_open,
> > > .postclose = vgem_postclose,
> > > .gem_free_object_unlocked = vgem_gem_free_object,
> > > @@ -442,48 +434,49 @@ static struct drm_driver vgem_driver = {
> > > static int __init vgem_init(void)
> > > {
> > > int ret;
> > > + struct platform_device *pdev;
> > >
> > > - vgem_device = kzalloc(sizeof(*vgem_device), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > - if (!vgem_device)
> > > - return -ENOMEM;
> > > + pdev = platform_device_register_simple("vgem", -1, NULL, 0);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(pdev))
> > > + return PTR_ERR(vgem_device->platform);
> > I caught this line right above.
> > It should be: return PTR_ERR (pdev), right?
>
> Yes I will fix.
>
> > > - vgem_device->platform =
> > > - platform_device_register_simple("vgem", -1, NULL, 0);
> > > - if (IS_ERR(vgem_device->platform)) {
> > > - ret = PTR_ERR(vgem_device->platform);
> > > - goto out_free;
> > > + if (!devres_open_group(&pdev->dev, NULL, GFP_KERNEL)) {
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > + goto out_unregister;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&vgem_device->platform->dev,
> > > + dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev,
> > > DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> > > - ret = drm_dev_init(&vgem_device->drm, &vgem_driver,
> > > - &vgem_device->platform->dev);
> > > - if (ret)
> > > - goto out_unregister;
> > > - drmm_add_final_kfree(&vgem_device->drm, vgem_device);
> > > +
> > > + vgem_device = devm_drm_dev_alloc(&pdev->dev, &vgem_driver,
> > > + struct vgem_device, drm);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(vgem_device)) {
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(vgem_device);
> > > + goto out_devres;
> > > + }
> > > + vgem_device->platform = pdev;
> > >
> > > /* Final step: expose the device/driver to userspace */
> > > ret = drm_dev_register(&vgem_device->drm, 0);
> > > if (ret)
> > > - goto out_put;
> > > + goto out_devres;
> > >
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > -out_put:
> > > - drm_dev_put(&vgem_device->drm);
> > > - platform_device_unregister(vgem_device->platform);
> > > - return ret;
> > > +out_devres:
> > > + devres_release_group(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> > > out_unregister:
> > > - platform_device_unregister(vgem_device->platform);
> > > -out_free:
> > > - kfree(vgem_device);
> > > + platform_device_unregister(pdev);
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void __exit vgem_exit(void)
> > > {
> > > + struct platform_device *pdev = vgem_device->platform;
> > > +
> > Well, there has never been a check for a null vgem_device here before,
> > as in vkms. Should?
>
> I think it should, but that's kinda a separate patch. Want to type it?
Make sense. Ok, I can do that.
> -Daniel
>
> > > drm_dev_unregister(&vgem_device->drm);
> > > - drm_dev_put(&vgem_device->drm);
> > > + devres_release_group(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> > > + platform_device_unregister(pdev);
> > > }
> > >
> > > module_init(vgem_init);
> > > --
> > > 2.28.0
> >
> > Apart from these two points,
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Melissa Wen <melissa.srw@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Thanks!
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dri-devel mailing list
> > > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
