Hi Philipp,
(CC'ing Francesco)
My apologies for not having noticed the patch.
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 12:24:56PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:48:48PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > Asynchronous subdevice probing on imx-media with imx6-mipi-csi2 is
> > broken since commit 1f391df44607 ("media: v4l2-async: Use endpoints in
> > __v4l2_async_nf_add_fwnode_remote()").
> >
> > This is a side effect of imx6-mipi-csi2 having a single subdevice with
> > four separate source ports connected to different subdevices. Before,
> > the imx-media-csi and video-mux devices registered async sub-devices
> > via device fwnode that matched the imx6-mipi-csi2 device on their
> > respective notifiers. This caused the first asd to be put on the
> > notifier waiting list, and the other three to return -EEXIST and be
> > ignored.
> >
> > With async subdev registration via endpoint fwnode, all four asds are
> > distinct and three of them keep dangling on their notifiers after the
> > first one is bound.
> >
> > This patch modifies __v4l2_async_nf_has_async_subdev() to consider
> > asds matching different fwnode endpoints of the same sub-device equal
> > if the latter is already bound and matches via device fwnode. Further,
> > v4l2_async_register_subdev() is modified to remove dangling duplicate
> > asds that were registered before the sub-device was available to check
> > its fwnode.
To make sure I understand this correctly, you need both changes, with
the change in __v4l2_async_nf_has_async_subdev() meant to address asds
being added after the subdev has been registered, and the change in
v4l2_async_register_subdev() meant to address asds that have been added
before ?
The imx6 ipu drivers implement a "clever hack" to handle the
multi-endpoint issue that was never officially supported by v4l2-async.
Obviously, as it has worked so far, leaving it broken isn't a very nice
option. The fix feels a bit like a hack though, and a better solution
would be to allow subdevs to be matched multiple times, by multiple
consumers. That's a more intrusive change though, so I could be OK with
this as a short term fix, assuming it doesn't break anything else.
I would however want to ensure this doesn't get abused by new drivers.
Could we add a dev_warn() somewhere to indicate that multi-endpoint
matching is not supported and shouldn't be used until fixed ? Sakari,
what do you think ?
> > Fixes: 1f391df44607 ("media: v4l2-async: Use endpoints in __v4l2_async_nf_add_fwnode_remote()")
> > Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Any comments on this? The issue persists on v6.2-rc3.
Francesco, does this fix your issue ?
> > ---
> > drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > index 2f1b718a9189..b24220ed7077 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c
> > @@ -452,6 +452,22 @@ __v4l2_async_nf_has_async_subdev(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier,
> >
> > if (asd_equal(asd, sd->asd))
> > return true;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the asd matches an endpoint fwnode, handle sub-devices
> > + * with device fwnode that were already matched by another asd
> > + * with a different endpoint fwnode on the same device.
> > + */
> > + if (asd->match_type == V4L2_ASYNC_MATCH_FWNODE &&
> > + fwnode_graph_is_endpoint(asd->match.fwnode) &&
> > + sd->fwnode && !fwnode_graph_is_endpoint(sd->fwnode)) {
> > + struct fwnode_handle *devnode;
> > +
> > + devnode = fwnode_graph_get_port_parent(asd->match.fwnode);
> > + fwnode_handle_put(devnode);
> > + if (devnode == sd->fwnode)
> > + return true;
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > return false;
> > @@ -749,6 +765,24 @@ __v4l2_async_nf_add_i2c(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier, int adapter_id,
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__v4l2_async_nf_add_i2c);
> >
> > +static void v4l2_async_remove_duplicate_matches(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> > +{
> > + struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier;
> > +
> > + lockdep_assert_held(&list_lock);
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry(notifier, ¬ifier_list, list) {
> > + struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd;
> > +
> > + asd = v4l2_async_find_match(notifier, sd);
> > + if (!asd)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /* Remove from the waiting list */
> > + list_del(&asd->list);
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > int v4l2_async_register_subdev(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> > {
> > struct v4l2_async_notifier *subdev_notifier;
> > @@ -783,6 +817,15 @@ int v4l2_async_register_subdev(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> > if (ret)
> > goto err_unbind;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * At this point the asd is removed from the notifier wait list.
> > + * There might be other notifiers with asds matching different
> > + * fwnode endpoints of the same sd remaining. If the sd matches
> > + * by device fwnode, remove the dangling asds.
> > + */
> > + if (sd->fwnode && !fwnode_graph_is_endpoint(sd->fwnode))
> > + v4l2_async_remove_duplicate_matches(sd);
> > +
> > ret = v4l2_async_nf_try_complete(notifier);
> > if (ret)
> > goto err_unbind;
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
