On Wednesday 23 Mar 2016 13:47:42 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Wed, 23 Mar 2016 18:17:38 +0200 Sakari Ailus escreveu: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:00:59PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >> Em Wed, 23 Mar 2016 15:05:41 +0100 Hans Verkuil escreveu: > >>> On 03/23/2016 11:35 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >>>> Em Wed, 23 Mar 2016 10:45:55 +0200 Laurent Pinchart escreveu: > >>>>> Code that processes media entities can require knowledge of the > >>>>> structure type that embeds a particular media entity instance in > >>>>> order to cast the entity to the proper object type. This needs is > >>>>> shown by the presence of the is_media_entity_v4l2_io and > >>>>> is_media_entity_v4l2_subdev functions. > >>>>> > >>>>> The implementation of those two functions relies on the entity > >>>>> function field, which is both a wrong and an inefficient design, > >>>>> without even mentioning the maintenance issue involved in updating > >>>>> the functions every time a new entity function is added. Fix this > >>>>> by adding add an obj_type field to the media entity structure to > >>>>> carry the information. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > >>>>> <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Acked-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> > >>>>> drivers/media/media-device.c | 2 + > >>>>> drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-dev.c | 1 + > >>>>> drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-subdev.c | 1 + > >>>>> include/media/media-entity.h | 79 ++++++++++++------------ > >>>>> 4 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/media-device.c > >>>>> b/drivers/media/media-device.c > >>>>> index 4a97d92a7e7d..88d8de3b7a4f 100644 > >>>>> --- a/drivers/media/media-device.c > >>>>> +++ b/drivers/media/media-device.c > >>>>> @@ -580,6 +580,8 @@ int __must_check > >>>>> media_device_register_entity(struct media_device *mdev,> > > >> > >>>>> "Entity type for entity %s was not initialized!\n", > >>>>> entity->name); > >>>>> > >>>>> + WARN_ON(entity->obj_type == MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_INVALID); > >>>>> + > >>>> > >>>> This is not ok. There are valid cases where the entity is not > >>>> embedded on some other struct. That's the case of > >>>> connectors/connections, for example: a connector/connection entity > >>>> doesn't need anything else but struct media device. > >>> > >>> Once connectors are enabled, then we do need a > >>> MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_CONNECTOR or MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_STANDALONE or > >>> something along those lines. > >>> > >>>> Also, this is V4L2 specific. Neither ALSA nor DVB need to use > >>>> container_of(). Actually, this won't even work there, as the entity > >>>> is stored as a pointer, and not as an embedded data. > >>> > >>> Any other subsystem that *does* embed this can use obj_type. If it > >>> doesn't embed it in anything, then MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_STANDALONE > >>> should be used (or whatever name we give it). I agree that we need a > >>> type define for the case where it is not embedded. > >>> > >>>> So, if we're willing to do this, then it should, instead, create > >>>> something like: > >>>> > >>>> struct embedded_media_entity { > >>>> struct media_entity entity; > >>>> enum media_entity_type obj_type; > >>>> }; > >>> > >>> It's not v4l2 specific. It is just that v4l2 is the only subsystem > >>> that requires this information at the moment. I see no reason at all > >>> to create such an ugly struct. > >> > >> At the minute we added a BUG_ON() there, it became mandatory that all > >> struct media_entity to be embedded. This is not always true, but > >> as the intention is to avoid the risk of embedding it without a type, > >> it makes sense to have the above struct. This way, the obj_type > >> usage will be enforced *only* in the places where it is needed. > >> > >> We could, instead, remove BUG_ON() and make MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_STANDALONE > >> the default type, but that won't enforce its usage where it is needed. > > > > My understanding, based on the previous discussion, was that the > > media_entity would in practice be always embedded in another struct. If > > that's not the case, I think Hans proposed a few good options for type > > enums telling the media_entity is not embedded in another struct. > > > > For what it's worth, my personal favourite is "NONE". > > A "standalone" type would work. "none" doesn't seem a good name > though, but I don't intend to spend much time with naming issues. > > >>> I very strongly suspect that other subsystems will also embed this in > >>> their own internal structs. > >> > >> They will if they need. > >> > >>> I actually wonder why it isn't embedded in struct dvb_device, > >>> but I have to admit that I didn't take a close look at that. The pads > >>> are embedded there, so it is somewhat odd that the entity isn't. > >> > >> The only advantage of embedding instead of using a pointer is that > >> it would allow to use container_of() to get the struct. On the > >> other hand, there's one drawback: both container and embedded > >> structs will be destroyed at the same time. This can be a problem > >> if the embedded object needs to live longer than the container. > >> > >> Also, the usage of container_of() doesn't work fine if the > >> container have embedded two objects of the same type. > >> > >> In the specific case of DVB, let's imagine we would use the above > >> solution and add a MEDIA_ENTITY_TYPE_DVB_DEVICE. > >> > >> If you look into struct dvb_device, you'll see that there are > >> actually two media_entities on it: > >> > >> struct dvb_device { > >> ... > >> struct media_entity *entity, *tsout_entity; > >> ... > >> }; > >> > >> If we had embedded them, just knowing that the container is > >> struct dvb_device won't help, as the offsets for "entity" > >> and for "tsout_entity" to get its container would be different. > >> > >> OK, we could have added two types there, but all of these > >> would be just adding uneeded complexity and wound't be error > >> prone. Also, there's no need to use container_of(), as a pointer > >> to the dvb_device struct is always there at the DVB code. > > > > If you wanted to obtain the dvb_device here, you'd instead add another > > struct that embeds the struct media_entity. This struct would contain a > > pointer to struct dvb_device. Simple and efficient. > > Why would someone need that? There's no need to embedding it at > the DVB core. Adding an extra struct just to make the media core > happy would just add extra complexity for no good reason. Sakari's point was that *if* you need to obtain the dvb_device pointer from the media_entity pointer you would add another structure. He didn't say you have to do so if you don't have such a requirement, there's no need to change anything. > >> The same happens at ALSA code: so far, there's no need to go from a > >> media_entity to its container. > >> > >> So, as I said before, the usage of container_of() and the need for an > >> object type is currently V4L2 specific, and it is due to the way > >> the v4l2 core and subdev framework was modeled. Don't expect or > >> force that all subsystems would do the same. > > > > What you do miss with using a pointer above is to find sub-system specific > > information related to the entity. It's a very common operation, if there > > is sub-system specific information related to an entity. I would say that > > if you don't, the driver creating the media device must be aware of a lot > > of the properties of the devices the media graph consists of, or use > > alternative means to associate subsystem specific information to entities. > > Looping over a linked list, for instance, is bound to be less efficient. > > The media device creation is handled by the core at the DVB side. > he knows already about any subsystem-specific data. > > > I don't see anything V4L2 specific here as such, even though no other > > sub-system would (yet) need the feature. > > Right now, this need happens in the case here the media entity is created > inside I2C devices, where the I2C driver doesn't know much about the > callers. > > Such need is specific to a few subsystems: like v4l2 and hwmon. > > Ok, other systems could need to do that in the future, but such > need assumes that the media_entities will be created by drivers > that are connected to the main driver via some bus, with is not > the generic case. On the ALSA side this seems a quite common case to me, as codecs are usually external chips. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html