On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:09:26PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 5:34 PM Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 02:08:53AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 1:40 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2/27/23 20:49, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 1:11 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 2/27/23 20:34, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > >>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:54 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On 2/27/23 20:15, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:38 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On 2/27/23 20:01, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:25 AM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> On 2/27/23 12:39, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>>> drm_of_dsi_find_panel_or_bridge is capable of looking up the
> > > > >>>>>>>>> downstream DSI bridge and panel and trying to add a panel bridge
> > > > >>>>>>>>> if the panel is found.
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Replace explicit finding calls with drm_of_dsi_find_panel_or_bridge
> > > > >>>>>>>>> followed with drmm_panel_bridge_add.
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> ---
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Changes for v13, v12, v11:
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - none
> > > > >>>>>>>>> Changes for v10:
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - new patch
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
> > > > >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> > > > >>>>>>>>> index df15501b1075..12a6dd987e8f 100644
> > > > >>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> > > > >>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dsi.c
> > > > >>>>>>>>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_atomic_helper.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_bridge.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/drm_of.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_panel.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_print.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> @@ -1470,24 +1471,26 @@ static int exynos_dsi_host_attach(struct mipi_dsi_host *host,
> > > > >>>>>>>>> struct device *dev = dsi->dev;
> > > > >>>>>>>>> struct drm_encoder *encoder = &dsi->encoder;
> > > > >>>>>>>>> struct drm_device *drm = encoder->dev;
> > > > >>>>>>>>> + struct drm_bridge *bridge;
> > > > >>>>>>>>> struct drm_panel *panel;
> > > > >>>>>>>>> int ret;
> > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - panel = of_drm_find_panel(device->dev.of_node);
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - if (!IS_ERR(panel)) {
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - dsi->out_bridge = devm_drm_panel_bridge_add(dev, panel);
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - } else {
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - dsi->out_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(device->dev.of_node);
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - if (!dsi->out_bridge)
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - dsi->out_bridge = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > > > >>>>>>>>> - }
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> As far as I understand this from my conversation with Maxime (please put
> > > > >>>>>>>> him on CC of V15), the change here should instead perform the panel look
> > > > >>>>>>>> up NOT in exynos_dsi_host_attach() , but in exynos_dsi_bind() , i.e. in
> > > > >>>>>>>> the component_ops .bind callback . Here is an example of correct
> > > > >>>>>>>> implementation:
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-misc/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_dsi.c#n1805
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> But, we don't have component_ops.bind for imx8m case, so where do we
> > > > >>>>>>> want to place the panel hook?
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Exynos drm drivers are component-based but, imx8mm is not.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> In 14/18 patch, the same should be added to generic_dsim_register_host()
> > > > >>>>>> , which is called from the driver .probe() callback, but that is OK.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> That's ^ is the iMX part.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ohh. You mean, we need to find the panel hook separately in two places like
> > > > >>>>> - bind for exynos
> > > > >>>>> - probe for imx8mm
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Yes
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> If so? how can I find the drm_device pointer in the probe?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> What for ? The panel lookup uses OF graph . Where do you need the
> > > > >>>> drm_device in it ?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> May I can summarize the whole setback here so that everybody is on the
> > > > >>> same page and find the proper solution?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The key blocker is accessing the DRM pointer in order to use the
> > > > >>> DRM-managed action helper.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> 1. If we find the panel hook in Exynos component_ops.bind then we can
> > > > >>> use the DRM pointer directly as VC4 does.
> > > > >>> 2. if we find the panel hook in Samsung drm_bridge_funcs.attach (for
> > > > >>> imx8mm) then we can use the DRM pointer directly via bridge->dev.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> If we make 2) has common across like finding the panel hook in
> > > > >>> drm_bridge_funcs.attach the Exynos drm pipeline cannot find the
> > > > >>> panels.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The common solution for both exynos and imx8m is host.attach but if we
> > > > >>> do so we cannot get find the DRM pointer.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There isn't going to be common solution, you would really have to do the
> > > > >> look up in component_ops .bind callback for exynos , and
> > > > >> generic_dsim_register_host() for i.MX .
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> If we go ahead with no need for DRM-managed helper at the moment, then
> > > > >>> find the panel hook in host.attach and then drop 2/18.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The panel lookup must happen in .bind/.probe for exynos/imx respectively
> > > > >> , that's really all that is required here. Then you can drop 1,2,3/18
> > > > >> and get this series applied (I hope) .
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not quite sure, if the panel hook in .bind work for exynos or not?
> > > >
> > > > Marek should be able to test exynos for you one more time I hope.
> > > >
> > > > > the host. attach has KMS hotplug code after the panel hook and
> > > > > bridge_attach as before. I believe that is a working scenario for
> > > > > Exynos to be the panel hook in the host. attach.
> > > >
> > > > As far as I understand it, the look up has to be in .bind callback (and
> > > > generic_dsim_register_host() for imx). Can you try if/how that works ?
> > > >
> > > > >> Can you implement just this one change ?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There is no need to use drmm_* helper for now, that can be improved
> > > > >> later if possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > If this is the case then 1/18 will need otherwise
> > > >
> > > > Ah yes, 1/18 will be needed indeed. It should just be called from .bind
> > > > callback or generic_dsim_register_host() (i.e. probe callback).
> > >
> > > panel hook at the probe call would be wrong.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > > the downstream bridge will call mipi_dsi_attach for finding the
> > > connected upstream, so it indeed calls host.attach. If we move the
> > > panel hook at the probe, then probing will defer.
> > >
> > > [ 12.046862] platform 32e10000.dsi: deferred probe pending
> > > [ 12.052309] platform 32e00000.lcdif: deferred probe pending
> >
> > What is the dependency chain there, and why doesn't it probe?
>
> Let me answer here for the above 2 queries.
>
> This is clearly a point 2 scenario from the documentation.
>
> "
> The upstream driver doesn’t use the component framework, but is a
> MIPI-DSI host. The bridge device uses the MIPI-DCS commands to be
> controlled. In this case, the bridge device is a child of the display
> device and when it will probe it’s assured that the display device
> (and MIPI-DSI host) is present. The upstream driver will be assured
> that the bridge driver is connected between the
> mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach and mipi_dsi_host_ops.detach operations.
> Therefore, it must run mipi_dsi_host_register() in its probe function,
> and then run drm_bridge_attach() in its mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach hook.
> "
>
> So, the samsung-dsim follows the same rule, mipi_dsi_host_register()
> in the probe and drm_bridge_attach() in mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach hook.
But samsung-dsim is used together with the component framework, so this
doesn't work.
Seriously, I've been telling you that it doesn't work. We spent an hour
discussing this with Marek yesterday who also explained this to you.
Stop trying to make that happen, it just doesn't work.
Can we leave that solution behind and move forward?
> Above also mentioned "The upstream driver will be assured that the
> bridge driver is connected between the mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach and
> mipi_dsi_host_ops.detach operations" that means we need to find the
> panel or bridge in mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach am I correct? not in the
> probe.
No, you're not correct. Just like the documentation, Marek and I have
repeatedly told you.
> lcdif => samsung-ti => dsim-sn65dsi (I2C) => panel this is the bridge
> chain. ti-sn65dsi is registered the MIPI Device and attaches the
> upstream driver via mipi_dsi_attach that indeed calls upstream driver
> mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach so if we move finding panel or bridge from
> mipi_dsi_host_ops.attach to the probe then dev->of_node cannot be
> valid so it will not find the bridge driver.
Why not, dev->of_node is very much valid at probe time.
Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
