Re: [PATCH 04/11] rcar-vin: Improve reuse of parallel notifier

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Niklas,

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 08:02:46PM +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> In preparation for adding a new media graph layout move the code reuse
> of the parallel notifier setup from probe directly to the current media
> graph initialization function. This is needed as there will be no
> parallel interface in the new graph layout.
>
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-core.c | 48 ++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-core.c b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-core.c
> index da23d55aa72b7f0d..81574bf33116ad59 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/rcar-vin/rcar-core.c
> @@ -702,9 +702,8 @@ static int rvin_parallel_init(struct rvin_dev *vin)
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>
> -	/* If using mc, it's fine not to have any input registered. */
>  	if (!vin->parallel.asd)
> -		return vin->info->use_mc ? 0 : -ENODEV;
> +		return -ENODEV;

Nit: isn't it better to keep the error handling here ?

>
>  	vin_dbg(vin, "Found parallel subdevice %pOF\n",
>  		to_of_node(vin->parallel.asd->match.fwnode));
> @@ -955,11 +954,9 @@ static int rvin_mc_parse_of_graph(struct rvin_dev *vin)
>
>  static void rvin_csi2_cleanup(struct rvin_dev *vin)
>  {
> -	if (!vin->info->use_mc)
> -		return;
> -
>  	rvin_group_notifier_cleanup(vin);
>  	rvin_group_put(vin);
> +	rvin_free_controls(vin);
>  }
>
>  static int rvin_csi2_init(struct rvin_dev *vin)
> @@ -979,11 +976,18 @@ static int rvin_csi2_init(struct rvin_dev *vin)
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto err_controls;
>
> -	ret = rvin_mc_parse_of_graph(vin);
> -	if (ret)
> +	/* It's OK to not have a parallel subdevice. */
> +	ret = rvin_parallel_init(vin);
> +	if (ret && ret != -ENODEV)
>  		goto err_group;
>
> +	ret = rvin_mc_parse_of_graph(vin);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto err_parallel;
> +
>  	return 0;
> +err_parallel:
> +	rvin_parallel_cleanup(vin);
>  err_group:
>  	rvin_group_put(vin);
>  err_controls:
> @@ -1469,27 +1473,20 @@ static int rcar_vin_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, vin);
>
> -	if (vin->info->use_mc) {
> +	if (vin->info->use_mc)
>  		ret = rvin_csi2_init(vin);
> -		if (ret)
> -			goto error_dma_unregister;
> -	}
> +	else
> +		ret = rvin_parallel_init(vin);
>
> -	ret = rvin_parallel_init(vin);
> -	if (ret)
> -		goto error_group_unregister;
> +	if (ret) {
> +		rvin_dma_unregister(vin);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
>
>  	pm_suspend_ignore_children(&pdev->dev, true);
>  	pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
>
>  	return 0;
> -error_group_unregister:
> -	rvin_free_controls(vin);
> -	rvin_csi2_cleanup(vin);
> -error_dma_unregister:
> -	rvin_dma_unregister(vin);
> -
> -	return ret;

This looks much much better and seems correct to me!

>  }
>
>  static int rcar_vin_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> @@ -1500,11 +1497,10 @@ static int rcar_vin_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>  	rvin_v4l2_unregister(vin);
>
> -	rvin_parallel_cleanup(vin);
> -
> -	rvin_csi2_cleanup(vin);
> -
> -	rvin_free_controls(vin);
> +	if (vin->info->use_mc)
> +		rvin_csi2_cleanup(vin);
> +	else
> +		rvin_parallel_cleanup(vin);

In the case use_mc == true but a parallel input was registered as well
this won't clean up the parallel notifier it seems.

Does it hurt to clean it up unconditionally ?

Thanks
  j
>
>  	rvin_dma_unregister(vin);
>
> --
> 2.31.1
>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SOC]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux