Hi Doug,
On 2025/1/24 11:13, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 3:25 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:07:40PM +0800, Damon Ding wrote:
The main modification is moving the DP AUX initialization from function
analogix_dp_bind() to analogix_dp_probe(). In order to get the EDID of
eDP panel during probing, it is also needed to advance PM operaions to
nit: s/operaions/operations
I will fix it in the next version.
ensure that eDP controller and phy are prepared for AUX transmission.
This doesn't sound right. Per the documentation of
drm_dp_aux::transfer(), the device should power itself up if transfer()
is called when it is powered off. The caller must only ensure that the
panel is on.
Doug, what's your opinion?
I think maybe the CL description is a bit confusing, but looking at
the patch I think that the general idea is correct. drm_dp_aux_init()
is expected to be called in probe() and not in bind(). ...and in order
for it to work then pm_runtime needs to be enabled at probe and not at
bind. So both of those two things that this patch does are (in my
opinion) correct.
In addtion, add a new function analogix_dp_remove() to ensure symmetry
for PM operations.
Signed-off-by: Damon Ding <damon.ding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v4:
- Use done_probing() to call drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge() and
component_add() when getting panel from the DP AUX bus
Changes in v5:
- Advance PM operations to make eDP AUX work well
Changes in v6:
- Use devm_pm_runtime_enable() instead of devm_add_action_or_reset()
- Add a new function analogix_dp_remove() to ensure symmetry for PM
operations
---
.../drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_core.c | 57 ++++++++++---------
.../gpu/drm/rockchip/analogix_dp-rockchip.c | 4 ++
include/drm/bridge/analogix_dp.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_core.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_core.c
index 8251adfce2f9..30da8a14361e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_core.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/analogix/analogix_dp_core.c
@@ -1658,14 +1658,42 @@ analogix_dp_probe(struct device *dev, struct analogix_dp_plat_data *plat_data)
}
disable_irq(dp->irq);
not related to your patch, but probably needs to be a prerequisite of
your patch: instead of calling disable_irq() here, you should OR in
"IRQF_NO_AUTOEN" to the "irq_flags" of devm_request_threaded_irq().
That not only closes a potential race condition but also makes all the
error handling much more robust.
Yes, it is nice to set the IRQF_NO_AUTOEN flag rather than calling the
disable_irq().
+ dp->aux.name = "DP-AUX";
+ dp->aux.transfer = analogix_dpaux_transfer;
+ dp->aux.dev = dp->dev;
+ drm_dp_aux_init(&dp->aux);
FWIW: I would highly encourage you to (in a separate patch) add
wait_hpd_asserted() support here. It is deprecated to not implement
wait_hpd_asserted(). See the definition of "wait_hpd_asserted" in
"struct drm_dp_aux" if you're going to support eDP panels.
Indeed, the &drm_dp_aux.wait_hpd_asserted() help confirm the HPD state
before doing AUX transfers. I will add it in the next version.
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM)) {
Do we really truly need this? Is there anyone actually using this
driver without "CONFIG_PM", or can we just assume CONFIG_PM. For the
most part drivers I've interacted with just assume CONFIG_PM and
they're a lot simpler because of it. If there's truly a need then we
can keep this complexity, but I'd rather wait until there is a user.
Maybe you could add this as a dependency in the Kconfig if needed.
I would also like to remove the CONFIG_PM related check, which would
make the code more concise. And I believe that it would be a good idea
to remove it and wait until there is a user who actually needs it.
+ pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(dp->dev);
+ pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(dp->dev, 100);
+ ret = devm_pm_runtime_enable(dp->dev);
+ if (ret)
+ goto err_disable_pm_runtime;
+ } else {
+ ret = analogix_dp_resume(dp);
+ if (ret)
+ goto err_disable_clk;
IMO: if analogix_dp_resume() succeeds, use devm_add_action_or_reset()
to have a function call analogix_dp_suspend(). Then you can keep using
"devm" for everything and totally get rid of the need for the
analogix_dp_remove() function.
It may be better to drop the 'complex' check about CONFIG_PM and just
keep using 'devm' as mentioned above.
+ }
+
return dp;
+err_disable_pm_runtime:
+ pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(dp->dev);
You don't need to call pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(). If you
enabled pm_runtime with devm_pm_runtime_enable() then it's documented
to handle calling pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() for you. See the
kernel doc comment for devm_pm_runtime_enable(). So you can get rid of
this.
Yeah, I find the comment in the definition of
pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() and I will remove it in the next version.
err_disable_clk:
clk_disable_unprepare(dp->clock);
return ERR_PTR(ret);
Huh? Why would you call "err_disable_clk" here? The only thing that
enables the clock is analogix_dp_resume(), right? There's something
fishy here and it predates your patch. I suspect there were problems
in commit f37952339cc2 ("drm/bridge: analogix_dp: handle clock via
runtime PM"). You should fix that in a separate patch before yours.
Yes, I believe there is a small bug in the commit mentioned above and I
will add a separate patch to fix it.
+void analogix_dp_remove(struct analogix_dp_device *dp)
+{
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM))
+ pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(dp->dev);
+ else
+ analogix_dp_suspend(dp);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(analogix_dp_remove);
See above. Proper use of "devm" should mean you don't need a remove() function.
Yeah, the analogix_dp_remove() is not needed based on the above discussion.
Best regards
Damon
