Hi Tomi, On 3/7/22 10:16, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On 07/03/2022 10:36, Hans Verkuil wrote: >> >> >> On 3/7/22 08:16, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>> Hi Hans, >>> >>> On 04/03/2022 15:34, Hans Verkuil wrote: >>>> Hi Tomi, >>>> >>>> On 3/1/22 11:55, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>>>> Add v4l2_subdev_call_state_active() macro to help calling subdev ops >>>>> that take a subdev state as a parameter. Normally the v4l2 framework >>>>> will lock and pass the correct subdev state to the subdev ops, but there >>>>> are legacy situations where this is not the case (e.g. non-MC video >>>>> device driver calling set_fmt in a source subdev). >>>>> >>>>> As this macro is only needed for legacy use cases, the macro is added in >>>>> a new header file, v4l2-subdev-legacy.h. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> include/media/v4l2-subdev-legacy.h | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 include/media/v4l2-subdev-legacy.h >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-subdev-legacy.h b/include/media/v4l2-subdev-legacy.h >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 000000000000..6a61e579b629 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/include/media/v4l2-subdev-legacy.h >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ >>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */ >>>>> +/* >>>>> + * V4L2 sub-device legacy support header. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * Copyright (C) 2022 Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> + */ >>>>> + >>>>> +#ifndef _V4L2_SUBDEV_LEGACY_H >>>>> +#define _V4L2_SUBDEV_LEGACY_H >>>>> + >>>>> +/** >>>>> + * v4l2_subdev_call_state_active - call an operation of a v4l2_subdev which >>>>> + * takes state as a parameter, passing the >>>>> + * subdev its active state. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * @sd: pointer to the &struct v4l2_subdev >>>>> + * @o: name of the element at &struct v4l2_subdev_ops that contains @f. >>>>> + * Each element there groups a set of callbacks functions. >>>>> + * @f: callback function to be called. >>>>> + * The callback functions are defined in groups, according to >>>>> + * each element at &struct v4l2_subdev_ops. >>>>> + * @args: arguments for @f. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * This is similar to v4l2_subdev_call(), except that this version can only be >>>>> + * used for ops that take a subdev state as a parameter. The macro will get the >>>>> + * active state and lock it before calling the op, and unlock it after the >>>>> + * call. >>>>> + */ >>>> >>>> You should explain why this is a legacy macro and, ideally, what would need to >>>> be done to get rid of it. The first is in the commit log, but nobody reads that :-) >>>> >>>> But if just using it in a non-MC video device driver constitutes 'legacy' use, >>>> then I disagree with that. There are many non-MC video device drivers, nothing >>>> legacy about that. >>> >>> It's difficult to define all the scenarios where this can be used, but the ones I can imagine fall under legacy (depending on how you define that, though). >>> >>> I use this in CAL driver, which supports non-MC (legacy) and MC. CAL has a bunch of video devices (one for each DMA engine) and two CSI-2 PHY devices (v4l2 subdevs). >>> >>> When operating in MC mode, the userspace will call, e.g., set_fmt in the PHY subdev, and so forth. >>> >>> But in non-MC case the userspace calls VIDIOC_S_FMT in the video dev, and the video dev has to propagate that to the PHY subdev. I do this propagation using the v4l2_subdev_call_state_active macro. >>> >>> I don't know if there are other drivers that support both non-MC and MC modes. I could also just move this macro to the CAL driver, and we could add this to the v4l2 framework if we see other drivers using similar constructs. >> >> It is common to have non-MC drivers that call set_fmt of a subdev. >> Wouldn't they all need to use this helper macro? If so, then this is NOT a >> legacy use, it's just a non-MC driver use. > > These non-MC drivers that call set_fmt of a subdev, they're video device drivers, right? In other words, there are no subdev drivers that call set_fmt on other subdevs? Probably not, but I am not 100% certain. There are a few nested subdev cases, but I don't remember which. > > This does get a bit complex, keeping the old and new code working together. In this context, I think we have three different "classes": > > 1. non-MC > 2. MC, no state support > 3. MC, state support Are you talking about subdev drivers or bridge drivers? It's a bit confusing. I'm assuming it can be either. > > We have classes 1 and 2 in upstream, and 3 will be enabled with this series (and expanded with the streams series). > > Classes 1 and 2 continue working as before. If you have a pipeline with only class 3 drivers, it works without any legacy "hacks". The problems come when you combine 1 or 2 with 3. Or possibly the problems appear only when combining class 1 and class 3, as class 2 drivers are not supposed to call subdev ops which take a state parameter on other subdevs. > > A class 3 driver expects to get either a try or an active state as a parameter, but class 1 drivers pass NULL for the active state. If you write a class 3 driver and want it to work with class 1 (without any changes to those drivers), you must do extra plumbing in the ops functions, to catch the NULL state case and get & lock the state yourself. If you do that, this macro is not needed. > > Alternatively, class 1 drivers could be changed to use this macro, so that a possible class 3 driver in the pipeline would work without additional code. But there are a lot of class 1 drivers, and thus modifications, and I wasn't planning to go that way. > > The CAL driver I mentioned supports both class 1 and class 3 (via a module parameter) in the video dev driver, and the class 1 mode uses this macro as CAL's PHY subdev (part of the same driver) is a class 3 subdev. The class 1 support is legacy support in CAL's case. > > So... Depending on what kind of driver combinations we want to support, this may or may not be legacy, depending on how you define legacy =). Let me try to explain what my concerns are. Eventually I would really like all subdevs to be capable of working with MC bridge drivers, i.e. have state support. Bridge drivers can be either MC or non-MC. So I would like to know: 1.1) How to convert a subdev driver to a MC state-aware subdev driver? 1.2) What is the legacy code that such a MC state-aware subdev driver has to keep in order to work with older bridge drivers that do not support such subdev drivers? (i.e. they pass NULL as the state) 2.1) How to convert a bridge driver (either non-MC or MC, but no state support) to properly support a fully converted subdev (MC state-aware) driver? 2.2) What is the legacy code that such a bridge driver has to keep in order to work with older subdev drivers that are not yet MC state-aware? The code needed for 1.2 and 2.2 (helper functions/macros) is legacy code, and can be marked as such. If this is clear, then we can work towards converting both subdev and bridge drivers and eventually (might take years!) get rid of the legacy code. Removing support for case 2 is probably something that we want to do sooner than later. For the CAL driver I do not consider non-MC support as legacy. It's legacy in the context of the CAL driver only, but API-wise it is not since there are many non-MC bridge drivers. Converting all subdev drivers to support the same MC state mechanism is time consuming, but we've done such things before. Regards, Hans
