On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:35:52AM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 08:06:01PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
> >> Hi Thierry,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Thierry Reding
> >> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 04:58:25PM +0530, Ajay kumar wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Thierry Reding
> >> >> <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 02:13:58AM +0530, Ajay Kumar wrote:
> >> >> >> From: Rahul Sharma <Rahul.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This patch adds ps8622 lvds bridge discovery code to the dp driver.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rahul Sharma <Rahul.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Ajay Kumar <ajaykumar.rs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> ---
> >> >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c | 5 +++++
> >> >> >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c
> >> >> >> index 0ca6256..82e2942 100644
> >> >> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c
> >> >> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c
> >> >> >> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
> >> >> >> #include <drm/drm_panel.h>
> >> >> >> #include <drm/bridge/ptn3460.h>
> >> >> >> #include <drm/bridge/panel_binder.h>
> >> >> >> +#include <drm/bridge/ps8622.h>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> #include "exynos_drm_drv.h"
> >> >> >> #include "exynos_dp_core.h"
> >> >> >> @@ -999,6 +1000,10 @@ static int exynos_drm_attach_lcd_bridge(struct exynos_dp_device *dp,
> >> >> >> if (find_bridge("nxp,ptn3460", &bridge)) {
> >> >> >> bridge_chain = ptn3460_init(dp->drm_dev, encoder, bridge.client,
> >> >> >> bridge.node);
> >> >> >> + } else if (find_bridge("parade,ps8622", &bridge) ||
> >> >> >> + find_bridge("parade,ps8625", &bridge)) {
> >> >> >> + bridge_chain = ps8622_init(dp->drm_dev, encoder, bridge.client,
> >> >> >> + bridge.node);
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We really ought to be adding some sort of registry at some point.
> >> >> > Otherwise every driver that wants to use bridges needs to come up with a
> >> >> > similar set of helpers to instantiate them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Also you're making this driver depend on (now) two bridges, whereas it
> >> >> > really shouldn't matter which exact types it supports. Bridges should be
> >> >> > exposed via a generic interface.
> >> >>
> >> >> How about moving out the find_bridge() function into a common header file,
> >> >> and also supporting the list of bridge_init declarations in the same file?
> >> >>
> >> >> We get bridge chip node from phandle, and then pass the same node
> >> >> to find_bridge() which searches the list using of_device_is_compatible()
> >> >> to call the appropriate bridge_init function?
> >> >
> >> > That could work, but it's still somewhat unusual and shouldn't be
> >> > required. I think we'd be better of with some sort of registry like we
> >> > have for panels. That would mean that a driver that wants to use a
> >> > bridge would do something like this:
> >> >
> >> > struct drm_bridge *bridge;
> >> > struct device_node *np;
> >> >
> >> > np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "bridge", 0);
> >> > if (np) {
> >> > bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(np);
> >> > of_node_put(np);
> >> >
> >> > if (!bridge)
> >> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > An alternative way would be to add a non-OF wrapper around this, like
> >> > this for example:
> >> Let me try the DT version first :)
> >>
> >> > bridge = drm_bridge_get(dev, NULL);
> >> >
> >> > Which would be conceptually the same as clk_get() or regulator_get() and
> >> > could be easily extended to support non-DT setups as well.
> >> >
> >> > As for bridge drivers I think we may have to rework things a little, so
> >> > that a driver can call some sequence like this:
> >> >
> >> > struct foo_bridge {
> >> > struct drm_bridge base;
> >> > ...
> >> > };
> >> >
> >> > static const struct drm_bridge_funcs foo_bridge_funcs = {
> >> > ...
> >> > };
> >> >
> >> > static int foo_probe(...)
> >> > {
> >> > struct foo_bridge *bridge;
> >> > int err;
> >> >
> >> > bridge = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*bridge), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> > if (!bridge)
> >> > return -ENOMEM;
> >> >
> >> > /* setup bridge (return -EPROBE_DEFER if necessary, ...) */
> >> >
> >> > /* register bridge with DRM */
> >> > drm_bridge_init(&bridge->base);
> >> > bridge->base.dev = dev;
> >> > bridge->base.funcs = &foo_bridge_funcs;
> >> >
> >> > err = drm_bridge_add(&bridge->base);
> >> > if (err < 0)
> >> > return err;
> >> >
> >> > dev_set_drvdata(dev, bridge);
> >> > ...
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > drm_bridge_add() would add the bridge to a global list of bridge devices
> >> > which drm_bridge_get()/of_drm_find_bridge() can use to find the one that
> >> > it needs. The above has the big advantage that it'sdev->mode_config.bridge_list completely
> >> > independent of the underlying bus that the bridge is on. It could be I2C
> >> > or SPI, platform device or PCI device.
> >> >
> >> > Thierry
> >> Ok. This is all about making the bridge driver confine to the driver model.
> >> But, I would need a drm_device pointer to register the bridge to DRM core.
> >> How do I get it?
> >
> > Once you've obtained a reference to the DRM bridge from your driver you
> > should carry it around until you've set up the DRM device. Then you can
> > hook it up, which possibly requires a new function (since it's what the
> > drm_bridge_init() used to do).
>
> Ok. We can have 2 parts:
>
> Non-DRM part:
> In order to get a reference for drm_bridge in my encoder driver, I
> should be using
> of_drm_find_bridge(). In order to do that, I should have already added
> the bridge
> into a static list of bridges(using something like drm_bridge_add).
> Also, bridge_funcs pointer is assigned to the bridge object in the
> bridge driver itself.
>
> DRM part:
> Assuming that the bridge driver probe will take care of calling
> drm_bridge_add(),
> I can then call drm_bridge_init from encoder driver, with a drm_bridge pointer
> and a drm_device pointer, which will actually register the bridge into DRM core.
Yes, exactly.
Thierry
Attachment:
pgp1X4oUOUFP5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
