Hi again, W dniu 14.09.2020 o 23:19, Andrzej Hajda pisze: > Hi Marek, Michael, > > On 14.09.2020 22:01, Michael Tretter wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 14:31:19 +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>> On 14.09.2020 10:29, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>>> On 11.09.2020 15:54, Michael Tretter wrote: >>>>> Make the exynos_dsi driver a full drm bridge that can be found and >>>>> used >>>>> from other drivers. >>>>> >>>>> Other drivers can only attach to the bridge, if a mipi dsi device >>>>> already attached to the bridge. This allows to defer the probe of the >>>>> display pipe until the downstream bridges are available, too. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> This one (and the whole series applied) still fails on Exynos boards: >>>> >>>> [drm] Exynos DRM: using 11c00000.fimd device for DMA mapping >>>> operations >>>> exynos-drm exynos-drm: bound 11c00000.fimd (ops fimd_component_ops) >>>> OF: graph: no port node found in /soc/dsi@11c80000 >>>> 8<--- cut here --- >>>> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address >>>> 00000084 >>>> pgd = (ptrval) >>>> [00000084] *pgd=00000000 >>>> Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM >>>> Modules linked in: >>>> CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted >>>> 5.9.0-rc4-next-20200911-00010-g417dc70d70ec #1608 >>>> Hardware name: Samsung Exynos (Flattened Device Tree) >>>> PC is at drm_bridge_attach+0x18/0x164 >>>> LR is at exynos_dsi_bind+0x88/0xa8 >>>> pc : [<c0628c08>] lr : [<c064d560>] psr: 20000013 >>>> sp : ef0dfca8 ip : 00000002 fp : c13190e0 >>>> r10: 00000000 r9 : ee46d580 r8 : c13190e0 >>>> r7 : ee438800 r6 : 00000018 r5 : ef253810 r4 : ef39e840 >>>> r3 : 00000000 r2 : 00000018 r1 : ef39e888 r0 : ef39e840 >>>> Flags: nzCv IRQs on FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none >>>> Control: 10c5387d Table: 4000404a DAC: 00000051 >>>> Process swapper/0 (pid: 1, stack limit = 0x(ptrval)) >>>> Stack: (0xef0dfca8 to 0xef0e0000) >>>> ... >>>> [<c0628c08>] (drm_bridge_attach) from [<c064d560>] >>>> (exynos_dsi_bind+0x88/0xa8) >>>> [<c064d560>] (exynos_dsi_bind) from [<c066a800>] >>>> (component_bind_all+0xfc/0x290) >>>> [<c066a800>] (component_bind_all) from [<c0649dc0>] >>>> (exynos_drm_bind+0xe4/0x19c) >>>> [<c0649dc0>] (exynos_drm_bind) from [<c066ad74>] >>>> (try_to_bring_up_master+0x1e4/0x2c4) >>>> [<c066ad74>] (try_to_bring_up_master) from [<c066b2b4>] >>>> (component_master_add_with_match+0xd4/0x108) >>>> [<c066b2b4>] (component_master_add_with_match) from [<c0649ae8>] >>>> (exynos_drm_platform_probe+0xe4/0x110) >>>> [<c0649ae8>] (exynos_drm_platform_probe) from [<c0674e6c>] >>>> (platform_drv_probe+0x6c/0xa4) >>>> [<c0674e6c>] (platform_drv_probe) from [<c067242c>] >>>> (really_probe+0x200/0x4fc) >>>> [<c067242c>] (really_probe) from [<c06728f0>] >>>> (driver_probe_device+0x78/0x1fc) >>>> [<c06728f0>] (driver_probe_device) from [<c0672cd8>] >>>> (device_driver_attach+0x58/0x60) >>>> [<c0672cd8>] (device_driver_attach) from [<c0672dbc>] >>>> (__driver_attach+0xdc/0x174) >>>> [<c0672dbc>] (__driver_attach) from [<c06701b4>] >>>> (bus_for_each_dev+0x68/0xb4) >>>> [<c06701b4>] (bus_for_each_dev) from [<c06714e8>] >>>> (bus_add_driver+0x158/0x214) >>>> [<c06714e8>] (bus_add_driver) from [<c0673c1c>] >>>> (driver_register+0x78/0x110) >>>> [<c0673c1c>] (driver_register) from [<c0649ca8>] >>>> (exynos_drm_init+0xe4/0x118) >>>> [<c0649ca8>] (exynos_drm_init) from [<c0102484>] >>>> (do_one_initcall+0x8c/0x42c) >>>> [<c0102484>] (do_one_initcall) from [<c11011c0>] >>>> (kernel_init_freeable+0x190/0x1dc) >>>> [<c11011c0>] (kernel_init_freeable) from [<c0af7880>] >>>> (kernel_init+0x8/0x118) >>>> [<c0af7880>] (kernel_init) from [<c0100114>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20) >>>> Exception stack(0xef0dffb0 to 0xef0dfff8) >>>> ... >>>> ---[ end trace ee27f313f9ed9da1 ]--- >>>> >>>> # arm-linux-gnueabi-addr2line -e vmlinux c0628c08 >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c:184 (discriminator 1) >>>> >>>> I will try to debug it a bit more today. >>> The above crash has been caused by lack of in_bridge initialization to >>> NULL in exynos_dsi_bind() in this patch. However, fixing it reveals >>> another issue: >>> >>> [drm] Exynos DRM: using 11c00000.fimd device for DMA mapping operations >>> exynos-drm exynos-drm: bound 11c00000.fimd (ops fimd_component_ops) >>> OF: graph: no port node found in /soc/dsi@11c80000 >>> 8<--- cut here --- >>> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address >>> 00000280 >>> pgd = (ptrval) >>> [00000280] *pgd=00000000 >>> Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM >>> Modules linked in: >>> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted >>> 5.9.0-rc4-next-20200911-00010-g417dc70d70ec-dirty #1613 >>> Hardware name: Samsung Exynos (Flattened Device Tree) >>> PC is at __mutex_lock+0x54/0xb18 >>> LR is at lock_is_held_type+0x80/0x138 >>> pc : [<c0afc920>] lr : [<c0af63e8>] psr: 60000013 >>> sp : ef0dfd30 ip : 33937b74 fp : c13193c8 >>> r10: c1208eec r9 : 00000000 r8 : ee45f808 >>> r7 : c19561a4 r6 : 00000000 r5 : 00000000 r4 : 0000024c >>> r3 : 00000000 r2 : 00204140 r1 : c124f13c r0 : 00000000 >>> Flags: nZCv IRQs on FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none >>> Control: 10c5387d Table: 4000404a DAC: 00000051 >>> Process swapper/0 (pid: 1, stack limit = 0x(ptrval)) >>> Stack: (0xef0dfd30 to 0xef0e0000) >>> ... >>> [<c0afc920>] (__mutex_lock) from [<c0afd400>] >>> (mutex_lock_nested+0x1c/0x24) >>> [<c0afd400>] (mutex_lock_nested) from [<c064d4b8>] >>> (__exynos_dsi_host_attach+0x20/0x6c) >>> [<c064d4b8>] (__exynos_dsi_host_attach) from [<c064d914>] >>> (exynos_dsi_host_attach+0x70/0x194) >>> [<c064d914>] (exynos_dsi_host_attach) from [<c0656b64>] >>> (s6e8aa0_probe+0x1b0/0x218) >>> [<c0656b64>] (s6e8aa0_probe) from [<c0672530>] >>> (really_probe+0x200/0x4fc) >>> [<c0672530>] (really_probe) from [<c06729f4>] >>> (driver_probe_device+0x78/0x1fc) >>> [<c06729f4>] (driver_probe_device) from [<c0672ddc>] >>> (device_driver_attach+0x58/0x60) >>> [<c0672ddc>] (device_driver_attach) from [<c0672ec0>] >>> (__driver_attach+0xdc/0x174) >>> [<c0672ec0>] (__driver_attach) from [<c06702b8>] >>> (bus_for_each_dev+0x68/0xb4) >>> [<c06702b8>] (bus_for_each_dev) from [<c06715ec>] >>> (bus_add_driver+0x158/0x214) >>> [<c06715ec>] (bus_add_driver) from [<c0673d20>] >>> (driver_register+0x78/0x110) >>> [<c0673d20>] (driver_register) from [<c0102484>] >>> (do_one_initcall+0x8c/0x42c) >>> [<c0102484>] (do_one_initcall) from [<c11011c0>] >>> (kernel_init_freeable+0x190/0x1dc) >>> [<c11011c0>] (kernel_init_freeable) from [<c0af7988>] >>> (kernel_init+0x8/0x118) >>> [<c0af7988>] (kernel_init) from [<c0100114>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20) >>> Exception stack(0xef0dffb0 to 0xef0dfff8) >>> ... >>> ---[ end trace c06e996ec2e8234d ]--- >>> >>> This means that dsi->encoder.dev is not initialized in >>> __exynos_dsi_host_attach(). >>> >>> This happens, because drm_bridge_attach() in exynos_dsi_bind() returned >>> earlier -517 (deferred probe), what causes cleanup of encoder and >>> release of all drm resources. >>> >>> Then however, the panel tries to register itself and >>> exynos_dsi_host_attach() tries to access the released encoder (which is >>> zeroed in drm_encoder_release) and rest of resources, what causes >>> failure. >>> >>> It looks that something is missing. Maybe mipi host has to be >>> registered >>> later, when bridge is ready? I have no idea how it is handled before >>> this patch. Andrzej, could you comment it a bit? >> I intentionally changed the order, because if another bridge follows >> in the >> pipeline, the probe of the drm driver has to be deferred until some >> bridge >> provides a connector. The next bridge registers itself via the >> host_attach >> function and the deferral is ensured via the bind for the bind/unbind >> API or >> the bridge_attach function otherwise. >> >> On the other hand, the bridge does not have an encoder until the mipi >> device >> has been attached. >> >> As a solution, the exynos dsi driver must initialize the encoder in >> exynos_dsi_probe instead of in exynos_dsi_bind and access the encoder >> via >> exynos_dsi instead of the bridge. >> >> Can you try to move everything except samsung_dsim_bind from >> exynos_dsi_bind >> to exynos_dsi_probe (respectively for unbind) and report if it fixes the >> crash. > > > The original behaviour is that encoder (exynos_dsi) is registered > regardless of sink presence (initially panel, later also bridge) - it > avoids multiple issues with deferred probe, device driver bind/unbind > and module load/unload. Appearance or disappearance of sink is > reported to host nicely via DSI attach/detach callbacks - and it is > reflected in drm world as change state of the connector. > > Registering DSI host in bind and unregistering in unbind assures that > if mipi_dsi device is attached/detached the drm device is always > present - it makes device/driver binding race free and allows to avoid > additional locking. > > Moving DSI host registration to probe changes everything, for sure it > breaks the nice feature of DSI attach/detach callbacks and apparently > can cause different issues depending on device bind order. > > I will try to look at the patches tomorrow and maybe I can find more > constructive comments :) As I said yesterday, exynos_dsi driver uses dsi host attach/detach callbacks to control appearance/disappearance of downstream device. It allows to: 1. Safely bind/unbind different device drivers at any time and at any order, without killing exynos_drm and/or crashing system. 2. Avoid issues with late drm init - on some platforms exynos_drm device appeared too late, due to deferred probe, and resulted in black screen in userspace. Now if we want to convert exynos_dsi to drm_bridge I see following options: A. Forgot about callbacks and make the exynos_drm to defer probing until exynos_dsi bridge is available, probably it will cause later exynos_drm appearance, thus probably black screen on some targets. So for sure it will be suboptimal. Making it bridge unbind safe would be another problem, but most developers do not care about it so why should we? :) B. Try to mimic current behaviour - exynos_dsi register bridge ASAP, even if downstream devices are not yet attached, on attach/detach notify drm about it via connector status change, for this dsi_host registration should be performed from drm_bridge attach, I guess. Option A is more standard, but is unsafe and causes other issues. Option B keeps current behaviour. Regards Andrzej > > > Regards > > Andrzej > > >> >> Michael >> _______________________________________________ >> dri-devel mailing list >> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=4f0be936-129547ac-4f0a6279-0cc47a336fae-e9aecfc5418740e8&q=1&e=1d4b0871-5b85-47f3-9506-79c768643aee&u=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-devel >>
