Hi,
On 16/02/2022 23:38, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Tomi,
Thank you for the patch.
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 03:00:47PM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
All suitable subdev ops are now passed either the TRY or the ACTIVE
state by the v4l2 core. However, other subdev drivers can still call the
ops passing NULL as the state, implying the active case.
For all current upstream drivers this doesn't matter, as they do not
expect to get a valid state for ACTIVE case. But future drivers which
support multiplexed streaming and routing will depend on getting a state
for both active and try cases.
For new drivers we can mandate that the pipelines where the drivers are
used need to pass the state properly, or preferably, not call such
subdev ops at all.
However, if an existing subdev driver is changed to support multiplexed
streams, the driver has to consider cases where its ops will be called
with NULL state. The problem can easily be solved by using the
v4l2_subdev_lock_and_return_state() helper, introduced here.
Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/media/v4l2-subdev.h | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h b/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
index 8d089a2dbd32..84c02488d53f 100644
--- a/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
+++ b/include/media/v4l2-subdev.h
@@ -1278,6 +1278,44 @@ void v4l2_subdev_lock_state(struct v4l2_subdev_state *state);
*/
void v4l2_subdev_unlock_state(struct v4l2_subdev_state *state);
+/**
+ * v4l2_subdev_lock_and_return_state() - Gets locked try or active subdev state
+ * @sd: subdevice
+ * @state: subdevice state as passed to the subdev op
+ *
+ * Due to legacy reasons, when subdev drivers call ops in other subdevs they use
+ * NULL as the state parameter, as subdevs always used to have their active
+ * state stored privately.
+ *
+ * However, newer state-aware subdev drivers, which store their active state in
+ * a common place, subdev->active_state, expect to always get a proper state as
+ * a parameter.
+ *
+ * These state-aware drivers can use v4l2_subdev_lock_and_return_state() instead
+ * of v4l2_subdev_lock_state(). v4l2_subdev_lock_and_return_state() solves the
+ * issue by using subdev->active_state in case the passed state is NULL.
+ *
+ * This is a temporary helper function, and should be removed when we can ensure
+ * that all drivers pass proper state when calling other subdevs.
+ */
+static inline struct v4l2_subdev_state *
+v4l2_subdev_lock_and_return_state(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
+ struct v4l2_subdev_state *state)
+{
+ if (state)
+ return state;
+
+ dev_notice_once(sd->dev,
+ "The provided state is NULL. Adjusting to the subdev active state.\n"
+ "Please consider porting your driver to the new state management API.\n");
+
+ state = sd->active_state;
+
+ v4l2_subdev_lock_state(state);
This looks strange, if the state parameter is not NULL then you don't
lock the state, otherwise you do. How is the caller of this function
expected to unlock the state ? I'm tempted to drop this helper and push
harder for porting drivers to the new API.
Indeed, I didn't think it through. Handling this with the new locking
model is a bit more difficult. The driver could do something like this:
static int my_subdev_op(sd, _state)
{
state = _state ? _state : v4l2_subdev_lock_active_state();
...
if (!_state)
v4l2_subdev_unlock_state(state);
return 0;
}
But hiding that behind a helper is not so easy.
Perhaps it is better to drop this, and change the calling subdev drivers
to use the v4l2_subdev_call_state_active() helper.
Tomi
