Hi Biju,
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:21:38AM +0000, Biju Das wrote:
> On 15 March 2021 03:43, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 02:50:23PM +0000, Biju Das wrote:
> >>> On 10/03/2021 13:56, Biju Das wrote:
> >>>> Thanks for the feedback.
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] media: v4l: vsp1: Fix uif null pointer
> >>>>> access
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Biju,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 01/03/2021 12:08, Biju Das wrote:
> >>>>>> RZ/G2L SoC has no UIF. This patch fixes null pointer access,
> >>>>>> when UIF module is not used.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Fixes: 5e824f989e6e8("media: v4l: vsp1: Integrate DISCOM in
> >>>>>> display pipeline")
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c | 4 ++--
> >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c
> >>>>>> b/drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c
> >>>>>> index f6d2f47a4058..06f74d410973 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c
> >>>>>> @@ -462,9 +462,9 @@ static int
> >>>>>> vsp1_du_pipeline_setup_inputs(struct
> >>>>>> vsp1_device *vsp1,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This looks like it complicates these conditionals more than we
> >>>>> perhaps need to.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What do you think about adding something above the block comment here?:
> >>>>
> >>>> It is much better.
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch is accepted in media tree[1]. So not sure, should I
> >>>> send a follow up patch as optimization or drop this patch and send new one.
> >>>
> >>> Oh, I didn't realise these were in already. Sorry, I didn't see any
> >>> review on the list, and it was the earliest I had got to them.
> >>>
> >>>> Please suggest.
> >>>
> >>> Up to you, I don't think this would get dropped now it's integrated.
> >>> It's in, so if you want to update on top I believe that's fine.
> >>
> >> OK, Will send follow up patch as optimization.
> >
> > That would be nice.
> >
> > I don't think this patch should have been fast-tracked as a fix, as RZ/G2L
> > isn't supported in mainline yet as far as I can tell.
>
> Please correct me, if I am wrong. We have pluggable modules in VSP and with routing
> Register we can achieve any combination with the VSP driver we have.
>
> If it is the case, it is a bug which is fast-tracked as a fix.
> Otherwise(ie, driver doesn't have flexibility to support pluggable
> feature) I am agreeing with your statement.
My point was that this code is currently used only on platforms that
have a UIF, so there's should be no risk of this problem being
triggered. It should certainly be fixed to support RZ/G2L, but that's
not upstream yet.
> > Hans, next time, could we get a notification instead of a silent
> > merge ?
> >
> >>>>> if (!drm_pipe->uif)
> >>>>> return 0;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> * make sure it is present in the pipeline's list of entities if it
> >>>>>> * wasn't already.
> >>>>>> */
> >>>>>> - if (!use_uif) {
> >>>>>> + if (drm_pipe->uif && !use_uif) {
> >>>>>> drm_pipe->uif->pipe = NULL;
> >>>>>> - } else if (!drm_pipe->uif->pipe) {
> >>>>>> + } else if (drm_pipe->uif && !drm_pipe->uif->pipe) {
> >>>>>> drm_pipe->uif->pipe = pipe;
> >>>>>> list_add_tail(&drm_pipe->uif->list_pipe, &pipe->entities);
> >>>>>> }
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
