From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Cc: dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@siol.net>, Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Implement bridge connector operations Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 03:40:04 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YF07dHgNlK1RqVUA@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=UPqg0CnA1ZFR70Ym+m6ROemdFbYwk_=C3+SemP1X9hYw@mail.gmail.com> Hi Doug, On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 03:46:28PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 8:02 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > Implement the bridge connector-related .get_edid() operation, and report > > the related bridge capabilities and type. The .get_edid() operation is > > implemented with the same backend as the EDID retrieval from the > > connector .get_modes() operation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > index dc300fab4319..6f6e075544e8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > @@ -261,6 +261,18 @@ static void ti_sn_debugfs_remove(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata) > > pdata->debugfs = NULL; > > } > > > > +static struct edid *__ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata, > > + struct drm_connector *connector) > > +{ > > + struct edid *edid; > > + > > + pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev); > > + edid = drm_get_edid(connector, &pdata->aux.ddc); > > + pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev); > > As mentioned in my patch [1], the above is a bit iffy for eDP. > Specifically just doing a pm_runtime_get_sync() isn't enough to > actually be able to read the EDID. We also need to do any panel power > sequencing and potentially set the "ignore HPD" bit in the bridge to > actually read the EDID. > > I'll try to find some time to make this better--let's see if I get > distracted before I manage it. I've replied to your review of 05/11 with a possible solution. Fingers crossed :-) > > + > > + return edid; > > +} > > + > > /* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > * DRM Connector Operations > > */ > > @@ -277,11 +289,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_connector_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector) > > struct edid *edid = pdata->edid; > > int num, ret; > > > > - if (!edid) { > > - pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev); > > - edid = pdata->edid = drm_get_edid(connector, &pdata->aux.ddc); > > - pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev); > > - } > > + if (!edid) > > + edid = pdata->edid = __ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(pdata, connector); > > It feels weird to me that we are now exposing the get_edid() function > directly but we still need to implement get_modes(). I guess this is > because we might need to fallback to the hardcoded modes? ...but that > seems like it would be a common pattern for eDP bridges... Bridges are moving from creating the connector internally to providing a set of bridge operations to support connector creation externally (by the drm_bridge_connector helper, or by display drivers directly if needed). During the transition, both need to be implemented, hence the bridge .get_edid() operation for the new model, and the connector .get_modes() operation for the old model. > > if (edid && drm_edid_is_valid(edid)) { > > ret = drm_connector_update_edid_property(connector, edid); > > @@ -871,12 +880,21 @@ static void ti_sn_bridge_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge) > > pm_runtime_put_sync(pdata->dev); > > } > > > > +static struct edid *ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(struct drm_bridge *bridge, > > + struct drm_connector *connector) > > +{ > > + struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn_bridge(bridge); > > + > > + return __ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(pdata, connector); > > +} > > + > > static const struct drm_bridge_funcs ti_sn_bridge_funcs = { > > .attach = ti_sn_bridge_attach, > > .pre_enable = ti_sn_bridge_pre_enable, > > .enable = ti_sn_bridge_enable, > > .disable = ti_sn_bridge_disable, > > .post_disable = ti_sn_bridge_post_disable, > > + .get_edid = ti_sn_bridge_get_edid, > > }; > > > > /* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > @@ -1335,6 +1353,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > > > pdata->bridge.funcs = &ti_sn_bridge_funcs; > > pdata->bridge.of_node = client->dev.of_node; > > + pdata->bridge.ops = DRM_BRIDGE_OP_EDID; > > + pdata->bridge.type = DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP; > > Even with the few comments above, I think this is still fine to move > us in the right direction. Unless I manage to fix up the EDID reading > (in which case your patch would conflict and would need to be > tweaked), then: > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210304155144.3.I60a7fb23ce4589006bc95c64ab8d15c74b876e68@changeid/ -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Cc: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@siol.net>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>, dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Implement bridge connector operations Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 03:40:04 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YF07dHgNlK1RqVUA@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=UPqg0CnA1ZFR70Ym+m6ROemdFbYwk_=C3+SemP1X9hYw@mail.gmail.com> Hi Doug, On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 03:46:28PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 8:02 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > Implement the bridge connector-related .get_edid() operation, and report > > the related bridge capabilities and type. The .get_edid() operation is > > implemented with the same backend as the EDID retrieval from the > > connector .get_modes() operation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > index dc300fab4319..6f6e075544e8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c > > @@ -261,6 +261,18 @@ static void ti_sn_debugfs_remove(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata) > > pdata->debugfs = NULL; > > } > > > > +static struct edid *__ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata, > > + struct drm_connector *connector) > > +{ > > + struct edid *edid; > > + > > + pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev); > > + edid = drm_get_edid(connector, &pdata->aux.ddc); > > + pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev); > > As mentioned in my patch [1], the above is a bit iffy for eDP. > Specifically just doing a pm_runtime_get_sync() isn't enough to > actually be able to read the EDID. We also need to do any panel power > sequencing and potentially set the "ignore HPD" bit in the bridge to > actually read the EDID. > > I'll try to find some time to make this better--let's see if I get > distracted before I manage it. I've replied to your review of 05/11 with a possible solution. Fingers crossed :-) > > + > > + return edid; > > +} > > + > > /* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > * DRM Connector Operations > > */ > > @@ -277,11 +289,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_connector_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector) > > struct edid *edid = pdata->edid; > > int num, ret; > > > > - if (!edid) { > > - pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev); > > - edid = pdata->edid = drm_get_edid(connector, &pdata->aux.ddc); > > - pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev); > > - } > > + if (!edid) > > + edid = pdata->edid = __ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(pdata, connector); > > It feels weird to me that we are now exposing the get_edid() function > directly but we still need to implement get_modes(). I guess this is > because we might need to fallback to the hardcoded modes? ...but that > seems like it would be a common pattern for eDP bridges... Bridges are moving from creating the connector internally to providing a set of bridge operations to support connector creation externally (by the drm_bridge_connector helper, or by display drivers directly if needed). During the transition, both need to be implemented, hence the bridge .get_edid() operation for the new model, and the connector .get_modes() operation for the old model. > > if (edid && drm_edid_is_valid(edid)) { > > ret = drm_connector_update_edid_property(connector, edid); > > @@ -871,12 +880,21 @@ static void ti_sn_bridge_post_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge) > > pm_runtime_put_sync(pdata->dev); > > } > > > > +static struct edid *ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(struct drm_bridge *bridge, > > + struct drm_connector *connector) > > +{ > > + struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn_bridge(bridge); > > + > > + return __ti_sn_bridge_get_edid(pdata, connector); > > +} > > + > > static const struct drm_bridge_funcs ti_sn_bridge_funcs = { > > .attach = ti_sn_bridge_attach, > > .pre_enable = ti_sn_bridge_pre_enable, > > .enable = ti_sn_bridge_enable, > > .disable = ti_sn_bridge_disable, > > .post_disable = ti_sn_bridge_post_disable, > > + .get_edid = ti_sn_bridge_get_edid, > > }; > > > > /* ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > @@ -1335,6 +1353,8 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > > > pdata->bridge.funcs = &ti_sn_bridge_funcs; > > pdata->bridge.of_node = client->dev.of_node; > > + pdata->bridge.ops = DRM_BRIDGE_OP_EDID; > > + pdata->bridge.type = DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP; > > Even with the few comments above, I think this is still fine to move > us in the right direction. Unless I manage to fix up the EDID reading > (in which case your patch would conflict and would need to be > tweaked), then: > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210304155144.3.I60a7fb23ce4589006bc95c64ab8d15c74b876e68@changeid/ -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-26 1:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 112+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-22 3:01 [RFC PATCH 00/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Support DisplayPort mode Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] dt-bindings: drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi8: Make enable GPIO optional Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 10:29 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-22 10:29 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-27 16:42 ` Rob Herring 2021-03-27 16:42 ` Rob Herring 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: " Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 10:29 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-22 10:29 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Unregister AUX adapter in remove() Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:10 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:41 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 21:41 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 22:55 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 22:55 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 23:02 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 23:02 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-26 0:43 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-26 0:43 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-26 1:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-26 1:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Use bitmask to store valid rates Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:11 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:11 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:08 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 22:45 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-23 22:45 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 8:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-03-24 8:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with panel-bridge Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 10:19 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-22 10:19 ` Jagan Teki 2021-03-23 7:14 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:14 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 21:50 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 21:50 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-26 1:06 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-26 1:06 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Group code in sections Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:14 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:14 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Split connector creation to a function Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:15 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:15 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:44 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Implement bridge connector operations Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:15 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:15 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-24 22:46 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:46 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-26 1:40 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message] 2021-03-26 1:40 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Make connector creation optional Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Support DisplayPort (non-eDP) mode Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-24 22:47 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:47 ` Doug Anderson 2021-06-23 13:59 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 13:59 ` Laurent Pinchart 2022-02-23 18:04 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-02-23 18:04 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-02-23 18:20 ` Doug Anderson 2022-02-23 18:20 ` Doug Anderson 2022-03-04 15:49 ` Laurent Pinchart 2022-03-04 15:49 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Support hotplug detection Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-22 3:01 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-03-23 7:21 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-23 7:21 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-03-24 22:47 ` Doug Anderson 2021-03-24 22:47 ` Doug Anderson 2021-06-23 23:25 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 23:25 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 23:51 ` Doug Anderson 2021-06-23 23:51 ` Doug Anderson 2022-02-23 17:43 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-02-23 17:43 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-02-23 18:25 ` Doug Anderson 2022-02-23 18:25 ` Doug Anderson 2022-03-04 15:45 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-03-04 15:45 ` Kieran Bingham 2022-03-04 16:30 ` Doug Anderson 2022-03-04 16:30 ` Doug Anderson
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=YF07dHgNlK1RqVUA@pendragon.ideasonboard.com \ --to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \ --cc=a.hajda@samsung.com \ --cc=dianders@chromium.org \ --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=jernej.skrabec@siol.net \ --cc=jonas@kwiboo.se \ --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=narmstrong@baylibre.com \ --cc=swboyd@chromium.org \ /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: linkBe 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.