All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
To: DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Zack Rusin <zackr@vmware.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	Ilya Trukhanov <lahvuun@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 18/19] Revert "fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if a FB is already registered"
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:19:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <408ffe9b-f09f-dc7e-7f5e-a93b311a06fa@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YkwAhSt9HlbxcuZo@phenom.ffwll.local>

Hello Daniel,

On 4/5/22 10:40, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 10:36:35AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 01:19:26AM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>> On 2/8/22 22:08, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> This reverts commit fb561bf9abde49f7e00fdbf9ed2ccf2d86cac8ee.
>>>>
>>>> With
>>>>
>>>> commit 27599aacbaefcbf2af7b06b0029459bbf682000d
>>>> Author: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
>>>> Date:   Tue Jan 25 10:12:18 2022 +0100
>>>>
>>>>     fbdev: Hot-unplug firmware fb devices on forced removal
>>>>
>>>> this should be fixed properly and we can remove this somewhat hackish
>>>> check here (e.g. this won't catch drm drivers if fbdev emulation isn't
>>>> enabled).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this hack can't be reverted yet. Thomas' patch solves the issue
>>> of platform devices matched with fbdev drivers to be properly unregistered if
>>> a DRM driver attempts to remove all the conflicting framebuffers.
>>>
>>> But the problem that fb561bf9abde ("fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if
>>> a FB is already registered") worked around is different. It happens when the
>>> DRM driver is probed before the {efi,simple}fb and other fbdev drivers, the
>>> kicking out of conflicting framebuffers already happened and these drivers
>>> will be allowed to probe even when a DRM driver is already present.
>>>
>>> We need a clearer way to prevent it, but can't revert fb561bf9abde until that.
>>
>> Yeah that entire area is a mess still, ideally we'd have something else
>> creating the platform devices, and efifb/offb and all these would just
>> bind against them.
>>
>> Hm one idea that just crossed my mind: Could we have a flag in fb_info for
>> fw drivers, and check this in framebuffer_register? Then at least all the
>> logic would be in the fbdev core.
>

I can't answer right away since I've since forgotten this part of the code
and will require to do a detailed read to refresh my memory.

I'll answer later but preferred to mention the other question ASAP.
 
> Ok coffee just kicked in, how exactly does your scenario work?
> 
> This code I'm reverting here is in the platform_dev->probe function.
> Thomas' patch removes the platform_dev. How exactly can you still probe
> against a platform dev if that platform dev is gone?
>

Because the platform was not even registered by the time the DRM driver
probed and all the devices for the conflicting drivers were unregistered.
 
> Iow, now that I reponder your case after a few weeks I'm no longer sure
> things work like you claim.
>

This is how I think that work, please let me know if you see something
wrong in my logic:

1) A PCI device of OF device is registered for the GPU, this attempt to
   match a registered driver but no driver was registered that match yet.

2) The efifb driver is built-in, will be initialized according to the link
   order of the objects under drivers/video and the fbdev driver is registered.

   There is no platform device or PCI/OF device registered that matches.

3) The DRM driver is built-in, will be initialized according to the link
   order of the objects under drivers/gpu and the DRM driver is registered.
   
   This matches the device registered in (1) and the DRM driver probes.

4) The DRM driver .probe kicks out any conflicting DRM drivers and pdev
   before registering the DRM device.

   There are no conflicting drivers or platform device at this point.

5) Latter at some point the drivers/firmware/sysfb.c init function is
   executed, and this registers a platform device for the generic fb.

   This device matches the efifb driver registered in (2) and the fbdev
   driver probes.
   
   Since that happens *after* the DRM driver already matched, probed
   and registered the DRM device, that is a bug and what the reverted
   patch worked around.

So we need to prevent (5) if (1) and (3) already happened. Having a flag
set in the fbdev core somewhere when remove_conflicting_framebuffers()
is called could be a solution indeed.

That is, the fbdev core needs to know that a DRM driver already probed
and make register_framebuffer() fail if info->flag & FBINFO_MISC_FIRMWARE

I can attempt to write a patch for that.

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
To: DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Zack Rusin <zackr@vmware.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	Ilya Trukhanov <lahvuun@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 18/19] Revert "fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if a FB is already registered"
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:19:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <408ffe9b-f09f-dc7e-7f5e-a93b311a06fa@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YkwAhSt9HlbxcuZo@phenom.ffwll.local>

Hello Daniel,

On 4/5/22 10:40, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 10:36:35AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 01:19:26AM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>> On 2/8/22 22:08, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> This reverts commit fb561bf9abde49f7e00fdbf9ed2ccf2d86cac8ee.
>>>>
>>>> With
>>>>
>>>> commit 27599aacbaefcbf2af7b06b0029459bbf682000d
>>>> Author: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
>>>> Date:   Tue Jan 25 10:12:18 2022 +0100
>>>>
>>>>     fbdev: Hot-unplug firmware fb devices on forced removal
>>>>
>>>> this should be fixed properly and we can remove this somewhat hackish
>>>> check here (e.g. this won't catch drm drivers if fbdev emulation isn't
>>>> enabled).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this hack can't be reverted yet. Thomas' patch solves the issue
>>> of platform devices matched with fbdev drivers to be properly unregistered if
>>> a DRM driver attempts to remove all the conflicting framebuffers.
>>>
>>> But the problem that fb561bf9abde ("fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if
>>> a FB is already registered") worked around is different. It happens when the
>>> DRM driver is probed before the {efi,simple}fb and other fbdev drivers, the
>>> kicking out of conflicting framebuffers already happened and these drivers
>>> will be allowed to probe even when a DRM driver is already present.
>>>
>>> We need a clearer way to prevent it, but can't revert fb561bf9abde until that.
>>
>> Yeah that entire area is a mess still, ideally we'd have something else
>> creating the platform devices, and efifb/offb and all these would just
>> bind against them.
>>
>> Hm one idea that just crossed my mind: Could we have a flag in fb_info for
>> fw drivers, and check this in framebuffer_register? Then at least all the
>> logic would be in the fbdev core.
>

I can't answer right away since I've since forgotten this part of the code
and will require to do a detailed read to refresh my memory.

I'll answer later but preferred to mention the other question ASAP.
 
> Ok coffee just kicked in, how exactly does your scenario work?
> 
> This code I'm reverting here is in the platform_dev->probe function.
> Thomas' patch removes the platform_dev. How exactly can you still probe
> against a platform dev if that platform dev is gone?
>

Because the platform was not even registered by the time the DRM driver
probed and all the devices for the conflicting drivers were unregistered.
 
> Iow, now that I reponder your case after a few weeks I'm no longer sure
> things work like you claim.
>

This is how I think that work, please let me know if you see something
wrong in my logic:

1) A PCI device of OF device is registered for the GPU, this attempt to
   match a registered driver but no driver was registered that match yet.

2) The efifb driver is built-in, will be initialized according to the link
   order of the objects under drivers/video and the fbdev driver is registered.

   There is no platform device or PCI/OF device registered that matches.

3) The DRM driver is built-in, will be initialized according to the link
   order of the objects under drivers/gpu and the DRM driver is registered.
   
   This matches the device registered in (1) and the DRM driver probes.

4) The DRM driver .probe kicks out any conflicting DRM drivers and pdev
   before registering the DRM device.

   There are no conflicting drivers or platform device at this point.

5) Latter at some point the drivers/firmware/sysfb.c init function is
   executed, and this registers a platform device for the generic fb.

   This device matches the efifb driver registered in (2) and the fbdev
   driver probes.
   
   Since that happens *after* the DRM driver already matched, probed
   and registered the DRM device, that is a bug and what the reverted
   patch worked around.

So we need to prevent (5) if (1) and (3) already happened. Having a flag
set in the fbdev core somewhere when remove_conflicting_framebuffers()
is called could be a solution indeed.

That is, the fbdev core needs to know that a DRM driver already probed
and make register_framebuffer() fail if info->flag & FBINFO_MISC_FIRMWARE

I can attempt to write a patch for that.

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat


  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-05 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 145+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-08 21:08 [PATCH v2 00/19] fbcon patches, take two Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 01/19] fbcon: delete a few unneeded forward decl Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:17   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:17     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:17     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 02/19] fbcon: Move fbcon_bmove(_rec) functions Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 23:06   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-08 23:06     ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-08 23:06     ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-10 11:17   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:17     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:17     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 03/19] fbcon: Introduce wrapper for console->fb_info lookup Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:18   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:18     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:18     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 04/19] fbcon: delete delayed loading code Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:20   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:20     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:20     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 05/19] fbdev/sysfs: Fix locking Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:22   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:22     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 06/19] fbcon: Use delayed work for cursor Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 23:59   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-08 23:59     ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-08 23:59     ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-10 11:37   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:37     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:37     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:43   ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-10 11:43     ` [Intel-gfx] " Tetsuo Handa
2022-02-10 11:43     ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-04-05 20:54     ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 20:54       ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 20:54       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 07/19] fbcon: Replace FBCON_FLAGS_INIT with a boolean Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 08/19] fb: Delete fb_info->queue Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:38   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:38     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 09/19] fbcon: Extract fbcon_open/release helpers Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 11:46   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:46     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 11:46     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-05  8:45     ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:45       ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:45       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 10/19] fbcon: Ditch error handling for con2fb_release_oldinfo Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 14:14   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 14:14     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 14:14     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 11/19] fbcon: move more common code into fb_open() Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-10 14:16   ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 14:16     ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-10 14:16     ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 12/19] fbcon: use lock_fb_info in fbcon_open/release Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 13/19] fbcon: Consistently protect deferred_takeover with console_lock() Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 14/19] fbcon: Move console_lock for register/unlink/unregister Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 15/19] fbcon: Move more code into fbcon_release Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 16/19] fbcon: untangle fbcon_exit Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 17/19] fbcon: Maintain a private array of fb_info Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 18/19] Revert "fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if a FB is already registered" Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-09  0:19   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-09  0:19     ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-09  0:19     ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05  8:36     ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:36       ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:36       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:40       ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  8:40         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  9:19         ` Javier Martinez Canillas [this message]
2022-04-05  9:19           ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05  9:24           ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  9:24             ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  9:24             ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05  9:52             ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05  9:52               ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05  9:52               ` [Intel-gfx] " Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05 10:34               ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 10:34                 ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 10:34                 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 13:24                 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-04-05 13:24                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-04-05 13:24                   ` [Intel-gfx] " Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-04-05 13:33                   ` Greg KH
2022-04-05 13:33                     ` Greg KH
2022-04-05 13:33                     ` [Intel-gfx] " Greg KH
2022-04-05 16:12                     ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 16:12                       ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 16:12                       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 16:44                       ` Greg KH
2022-04-05 16:44                         ` [Intel-gfx] " Greg KH
2022-04-05 17:29                         ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 17:29                           ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-05 17:29                           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-04-07 17:26                           ` Greg KH
2022-04-07 17:26                             ` Greg KH
2022-04-07 17:26                             ` [Intel-gfx] " Greg KH
2022-04-05 13:25                 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05 13:25                   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-05 13:25                   ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-02-08 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 19/19] fbdev: Make registered_fb[] private to fbmem.c Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 21:08   ` Daniel Vetter
2022-02-08 23:15 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for fbcon patches, take two Patchwork
2022-02-08 23:18 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2022-02-08 23:50 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=408ffe9b-f09f-dc7e-7f5e-a93b311a06fa@redhat.com \
    --to=javierm@redhat.com \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lahvuun@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    --cc=zackr@vmware.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.