Maxime, On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 8:34 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 7:23 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, Sep 3, 2023 at 8:53 AM Russell King (Oracle) > > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 04:41:12PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote: > > > > Based on grepping through the source code this driver appears to be > > > > missing a call to drm_atomic_helper_shutdown() at system shutdown > > > > time. Among other things, this means that if a panel is in use that it > > > > won't be cleanly powered off at system shutdown time. > > > > > > > > The fact that we should call drm_atomic_helper_shutdown() in the case > > > > of OS shutdown/restart comes straight out of the kernel doc "driver > > > > instance overview" in drm_drv.c. > > > > > > > > This driver was fairly easy to update. The drm_device is stored in the > > > > drvdata so we just have to make sure the drvdata is NULL whenever the > > > > device is not bound. > > > > > > ... and there I think you have a misunderstanding of the driver model. > > > Please have a look at device_unbind_cleanup() which will be called if > > > probe fails, or when the device is removed (in other words, when it is > > > not bound to a driver.) > > > > ...and there I think you didn't read this patch closely enough and > > perhaps that you have a misunderstanding of the component model. > > Please have a look at the difference between armada_drm_unbind() and > > armada_drm_remove() and also check which of those two functions is > > being modified by my patch. Were this patch adding a call to > > "dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL)" in armada_drm_remove() then your NAK > > would be justified. However, I am not aware of anything in the > > component unbind path nor in the failure case of component bind that > > would NULL the drvdata. > > > > Kindly look at the patch a second time with this in mind. > > Since I didn't see any further response, I'll assume that my > explanation here has addressed your concerns. If not, I can re-post it > without NULLing the "drvdata". While I still believe this is unsafe in > some corner cases because of the component model used by this driver, > at least it would get the shutdown call in. > > In any case, what's the process for landing patches to this driver? > Running `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --scm -f > drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_drv.c` seems to indicate that this > should go through the git tree: > > git git://git.armlinux.org.uk/~rmk/linux-arm.git drm-armada-devel > > ...but it doesn't appear that recent changes to this driver have gone > that way. Should this land through drm-misc? Do you have any advice here? Should I land this through drm-misc-next, put it on ice for a while, or resend without the calls to NULL our the drvdata? Thanks! -Doug
