| Message ID | 20230727164114.20638-3-jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add dynamic connector selection mechanism | expand |
Hi, Jason: On Fri, 2023-07-28 at 00:41 +0800, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm > private > data into all_drm_priv array. Reviewed-by: CK Hu <ck.hu@mediatek.com> > > Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 > multi mmsys support") > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > index 249c9fd6347e..d2fb1fb4e682 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct > device *dev) > { > struct mtk_drm_private *drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > struct mtk_drm_private *all_drm_priv[MAX_CRTC]; > + struct mtk_drm_private *temp_drm_priv; > struct device_node *phandle = dev->parent->of_node; > const struct of_device_id *of_id; > struct device_node *node; > @@ -373,9 +374,18 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct > device *dev) > if (!drm_dev || !dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev)) > continue; > > - all_drm_priv[cnt] = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > - if (all_drm_priv[cnt] && all_drm_priv[cnt]- > >mtk_drm_bound) > - cnt++; > + temp_drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > + if (temp_drm_priv) { > + if (temp_drm_priv->mtk_drm_bound) > + cnt++; > + > + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) > + all_drm_priv[0] = temp_drm_priv; > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) > + all_drm_priv[1] = temp_drm_priv; > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->third_len) > + all_drm_priv[2] = temp_drm_priv; > + } > } > > if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) {
Il 27/07/23 18:41, Jason-JH.Lin ha scritto: > Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm private > data into all_drm_priv array. > > Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 multi mmsys support") > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Hi, On 7/27/23 19:41, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm private > data into all_drm_priv array. > > Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 multi mmsys support") > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > index 249c9fd6347e..d2fb1fb4e682 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct device *dev) > { > struct mtk_drm_private *drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > struct mtk_drm_private *all_drm_priv[MAX_CRTC]; > + struct mtk_drm_private *temp_drm_priv; > struct device_node *phandle = dev->parent->of_node; > const struct of_device_id *of_id; > struct device_node *node; > @@ -373,9 +374,18 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct device *dev) > if (!drm_dev || !dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev)) > continue; > > - all_drm_priv[cnt] = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > - if (all_drm_priv[cnt] && all_drm_priv[cnt]->mtk_drm_bound) > - cnt++; > + temp_drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > + if (temp_drm_priv) { > + if (temp_drm_priv->mtk_drm_bound) > + cnt++; > + > + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) > + all_drm_priv[0] = temp_drm_priv; > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) > + all_drm_priv[1] = temp_drm_priv; > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->third_len) > + all_drm_priv[2] = temp_drm_priv; > + } Previously the code was assigning stuff into all_drm_priv[cnt] and incrementing it. With your change, it assigns to all_drm_priv[0], [1], [2]. Is this what you intended ? If this loop has second run, you will reassign to all_drm_priv again ? I would expect you to take `cnt` into account. Also, is it expected that all_drm_priv has holes in the array ? Eugen > } > > if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) {
Hi Eugen, Thanks for the reviews. On Fri, 2023-07-28 at 11:47 +0300, Eugen Hristev wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/27/23 19:41, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > > Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm > > private > > data into all_drm_priv array. > > > > Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 > > multi mmsys support") > > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > > index 249c9fd6347e..d2fb1fb4e682 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c > > @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct > > device *dev) > > { > > struct mtk_drm_private *drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > > struct mtk_drm_private *all_drm_priv[MAX_CRTC]; > > + struct mtk_drm_private *temp_drm_priv; > > struct device_node *phandle = dev->parent->of_node; > > const struct of_device_id *of_id; > > struct device_node *node; > > @@ -373,9 +374,18 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct > > device *dev) > > if (!drm_dev || !dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev)) > > continue; > > > > - all_drm_priv[cnt] = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > > - if (all_drm_priv[cnt] && all_drm_priv[cnt]- > > >mtk_drm_bound) > > - cnt++; > > + temp_drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); > > + if (temp_drm_priv) { > > + if (temp_drm_priv->mtk_drm_bound) > > + cnt++; > > + > > + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) > > + all_drm_priv[0] = temp_drm_priv; > > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) > > + all_drm_priv[1] = temp_drm_priv; > > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->third_len) > > + all_drm_priv[2] = temp_drm_priv; > > + } > > Previously the code was assigning stuff into all_drm_priv[cnt] and > incrementing it. > With your change, it assigns to all_drm_priv[0], [1], [2]. Is this > what > you intended ? Because dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev) will get the driver data by drm_dev. Each drm_dev represents a display path. e,g. drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0" represents main path. drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1" represents ext path. So we want to make sure all_drm_priv[] store the private data in the order of display path, such as: all_drm_priv[0] = the private data of main display all_drm_priv[1] = the private data of ext display all_drm_priv[2] = the private data of third display > If this loop has second run, you will reassign to all_drm_priv again > ? Because the previous code will store all_drm_priv[] in the order of mtk_drm_bind() was called. If drm_dev of ext path bound earlier than drm_dev of main path, all_drm_priv[] in mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv() may be re-assigned like this: all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path But we expect all_drm_priv[] be re-assigned like this: all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path > I would expect you to take `cnt` into account. > Also, is it expected that all_drm_priv has holes in the array ? Each drm_dev will only called mtk_drm_bind() once, so all holes will be filled after all drm_dev has called mtk_drm_bind(). Do you agree with this statement? :) Regards, Jason-JH.Lin > > Eugen > > > > > } > > > > if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) { > >
On 7/31/23 11:21, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote: > Hi Eugen, > > Thanks for the reviews. > > On Fri, 2023-07-28 at 11:47 +0300, Eugen Hristev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 7/27/23 19:41, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: >>> Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm >>> private >>> data into all_drm_priv array. >>> >>> Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 >>> multi mmsys support") >>> Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c >>> index 249c9fd6347e..d2fb1fb4e682 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c >>> @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct >>> device *dev) >>> { >>> struct mtk_drm_private *drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >>> struct mtk_drm_private *all_drm_priv[MAX_CRTC]; >>> + struct mtk_drm_private *temp_drm_priv; >>> struct device_node *phandle = dev->parent->of_node; >>> const struct of_device_id *of_id; >>> struct device_node *node; >>> @@ -373,9 +374,18 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct >>> device *dev) >>> if (!drm_dev || !dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev)) >>> continue; >>> >>> - all_drm_priv[cnt] = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); >>> - if (all_drm_priv[cnt] && all_drm_priv[cnt]- >>>> mtk_drm_bound) >>> - cnt++; >>> + temp_drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); >>> + if (temp_drm_priv) { >>> + if (temp_drm_priv->mtk_drm_bound) >>> + cnt++; >>> + >>> + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) >>> + all_drm_priv[0] = temp_drm_priv; >>> + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) >>> + all_drm_priv[1] = temp_drm_priv; >>> + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->third_len) >>> + all_drm_priv[2] = temp_drm_priv; >>> + } >> >> Previously the code was assigning stuff into all_drm_priv[cnt] and >> incrementing it. >> With your change, it assigns to all_drm_priv[0], [1], [2]. Is this >> what >> you intended ? > > Because dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev) will get the driver data by drm_dev. > Each drm_dev represents a display path. > e,g. > drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0" represents main path. > drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1" represents ext path. > > So we want to make sure all_drm_priv[] store the private data in > the order of display path, such as: > all_drm_priv[0] = the private data of main display > all_drm_priv[1] = the private data of ext display > all_drm_priv[2] = the private data of third display If you have such a hard requirement for keeping elements in an array, you are better having drm_priv_main_display drm_priv_ext_display drm_priv_third_display Keeping them indexed in a three elements array by having no logical connection between the number [0,1,2] and the actual displays that you want to save is a bit confusing. One other option which I don't know if it's better or not is to have macros to hide your indexed approach: all_drm_priv[MAIN_DISPLAY] ... etc. > >> If this loop has second run, you will reassign to all_drm_priv again >> ? > > Because the previous code will store all_drm_priv[] in the order of > mtk_drm_bind() was called. > > If drm_dev of ext path bound earlier than drm_dev of main path, > all_drm_priv[] in mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv() may be re-assigned like > this: > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path > > But we expect all_drm_priv[] be re-assigned like this: > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path This expectation does not appear to be really enforced in your code. You have a driver that keeps an array with all_drm_priv[], in which you can have main path or ext path. Then it's natural that they might have whichever order in the array you are placing them into. If you have a hard enforced order of keeping elements in your array, then an indexed array is not the best option here. You can either: move to a different type of array , with macros for indexes into the array, or, store a second array/field which keeps the index in which you saved each element. This is just my opinion , by looking at your code. > >> I would expect you to take `cnt` into account. >> Also, is it expected that all_drm_priv has holes in the array ? > > Each drm_dev will only called mtk_drm_bind() once, so all holes > will be filled after all drm_dev has called mtk_drm_bind(). > > Do you agree with this statement? :) At the moment I cannot agree nor disagree, I don't know the code well enough. But what I can say, is that you should not rely on future calls of the function to fill up your array correctly. > > Regards, > Jason-JH.Lin > >> >> Eugen >> >> >> >>> } >>> >>> if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) { >> >>
Hi Eugen, On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 11:32 +0300, Eugen Hristev wrote: > On 7/31/23 11:21, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote: > > Hi Eugen, > > > > Thanks for the reviews. > > snip... > > > > + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) > > > > + all_drm_priv[0] = > > > > temp_drm_priv; > > > > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) > > > > + all_drm_priv[1] = > > > > temp_drm_priv; > > > > + else if (temp_drm_priv->data- > > > > >third_len) > > > > + all_drm_priv[2] = > > > > temp_drm_priv; > > > > + } > > > > > > Previously the code was assigning stuff into all_drm_priv[cnt] > > > and > > > incrementing it. > > > With your change, it assigns to all_drm_priv[0], [1], [2]. Is > > > this > > > what > > > you intended ? > > > > Because dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev) will get the driver data by > > drm_dev. > > Each drm_dev represents a display path. > > e,g. > > drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys0" represents main path. > > drm_dev of "mediatek,mt8195-vdosys1" represents ext path. > > > > So we want to make sure all_drm_priv[] store the private data in > > the order of display path, such as: > > all_drm_priv[0] = the private data of main display > > all_drm_priv[1] = the private data of ext display > > all_drm_priv[2] = the private data of third display > > If you have such a hard requirement for keeping elements in an > array, > you are better having > drm_priv_main_display > drm_priv_ext_display > drm_priv_third_display > > Keeping them indexed in a three elements array by having no logical > connection between the number [0,1,2] and the actual displays that > you > want to save is a bit confusing. > Yes, I think it was a bit confusing. But we don't know which drm_priv will go into this function first and we want to store all drm_priv into the same array. So it has come to this. > One other option which I don't know if it's better or not is to have > macros to hide your indexed approach: > all_drm_priv[MAIN_DISPLAY] ... > etc. > Thanks for your advice. I'll try to use macros to make it better and more readable. > > > > > > > If this loop has second run, you will reassign to all_drm_priv > > > again > > > ? > > > > Because the previous code will store all_drm_priv[] in the order of > > mtk_drm_bind() was called. > > > > If drm_dev of ext path bound earlier than drm_dev of main path, > > all_drm_priv[] in mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv() may be re-assigned > > like > > this: > > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path > > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of ext path > > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path > > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of main path > > > > But we expect all_drm_priv[] be re-assigned like this: > > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path > > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[0] = private data of main path > > all_drm_priv[0]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path > > all_drm_priv[1]->all_drm_priv[1] = private data of ext path > > This expectation does not appear to be really enforced in your code. > You have a driver that keeps an array with all_drm_priv[], in which > you can have main path or ext path. Then it's natural that they > might > have whichever order in the array you are placing them into. > If you have a hard enforced order of keeping elements in your array, > then an indexed array is not the best option here. > You can either: move to a different type of array , with macros for > indexes into the array, or, store a second array/field which keeps > the > index in which you saved each element. > > This is just my opinion , by looking at your code. > There is another statement in mtk_drm_kms_init() like this: for (i = 0; i < MAX_CRTC; i++) { for (j = 0; j< private->data->mmsys_dev_num; j++) { priv_n = private->all_drm_private[j]; if (i == 0 && priv_n->data->main_len) { ... } else if (i == 1 && priv_n->data->ext_len) { ... } else if (i == 2 && priv_n->data->third_len) { ... } } } So we need to make sure that each element in all_drm_priv[] has only one path data: all_drm_priv[0] has main_path data only all_drm_priv[1] has ext_path data only all_drm_priv[2] has third_path data only I think it would take quite a bit of effort to change this array usage. > > > I would expect you to take `cnt` into account. > > > Also, is it expected that all_drm_priv has holes in the array ? > > > > Each drm_dev will only called mtk_drm_bind() once, so all holes > > will be filled after all drm_dev has called mtk_drm_bind(). > > > > Do you agree with this statement? :) > > At the moment I cannot agree nor disagree, I don't know the code > well > enough. But what I can say, is that you should not rely on future > calls > of the function to fill up your array correctly. > I agree with your opinion, but at the moment, I just want to fix the issue first by having a less modification. I'll try to use macros to replace the array index and I'll add more description into commit message to express the current limitation in mtk_drm_kms_init(). Thanks again~ Regards, Jason-JH.Lin > > > > Regards, > > Jason-JH.Lin > > > > > > > > Eugen > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) { > > > > > > > >
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c index 249c9fd6347e..d2fb1fb4e682 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct device *dev) { struct mtk_drm_private *drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); struct mtk_drm_private *all_drm_priv[MAX_CRTC]; + struct mtk_drm_private *temp_drm_priv; struct device_node *phandle = dev->parent->of_node; const struct of_device_id *of_id; struct device_node *node; @@ -373,9 +374,18 @@ static bool mtk_drm_get_all_drm_priv(struct device *dev) if (!drm_dev || !dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev)) continue; - all_drm_priv[cnt] = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); - if (all_drm_priv[cnt] && all_drm_priv[cnt]->mtk_drm_bound) - cnt++; + temp_drm_priv = dev_get_drvdata(drm_dev); + if (temp_drm_priv) { + if (temp_drm_priv->mtk_drm_bound) + cnt++; + + if (temp_drm_priv->data->main_len) + all_drm_priv[0] = temp_drm_priv; + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->ext_len) + all_drm_priv[1] = temp_drm_priv; + else if (temp_drm_priv->data->third_len) + all_drm_priv[2] = temp_drm_priv; + } } if (drm_priv->data->mmsys_dev_num == cnt) {
Add checking the length of each data path before assigning drm private data into all_drm_priv array. Fixes: 1ef7ed48356c ("drm/mediatek: Modify mediatek-drm for mt8195 multi mmsys support") Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)