From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> To: Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, gwendal@google.com, seanpaul@google.com, marcheau@google.com, rajatxjain@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/privacy_screen_x86: Add entry for ChromeOS privacy-screen Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:50:25 -0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YcDegV8wqljpU3J0@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211217202850.1967594-2-rajatja@google.com> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:28:50PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote: > Add a static entry in the x86 table, to detect and wait for > privacy-screen on some ChromeOS platforms. > > Please note that this means that if CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN is > enabled, and if "GOOG0010" device is found in ACPI, then the i915 probe > shall return EPROBE_DEFER until a platform driver actually registers the > privacy-screen: https://hansdegoede.livejournal.com/25948.html > > Signed-off-by: Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com> > --- > v2: * Use #if instead of #elif > * Reorder the patches in the series. > * Rebased on drm-tip > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > index a2cafb294ca6..0c5699ad70a3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > @@ -47,6 +47,18 @@ static bool __init detect_thinkpad_privacy_screen(void) > } > #endif > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN) > +static bool __init detect_chromeos_privacy_screen(void) Does marking this __init work in case there is a deferral? Can it happen that privacy screen is a module and so will get loaded only after we discarded __init sections. > +{ > + if (!acpi_dev_present("GOOG0010", NULL, -1)) > + return false; > + > + pr_info("%s: Need to wait for ChromeOS privacy-screen drvr", __func__); I still do not see how this message is helpful. If it is really desired, I'd put something into the code that calls into lookups. > + return true; > + > +} > +#endif > + > static const struct arch_init_data arch_init_data[] __initconst = { > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_THINKPAD_ACPI) > { > @@ -58,6 +70,16 @@ static const struct arch_init_data arch_init_data[] __initconst = { > .detect = detect_thinkpad_privacy_screen, > }, > #endif > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN) > + { > + .lookup = { > + .dev_id = NULL, > + .con_id = NULL, > + .provider = "privacy_screen-GOOG0010:00", > + }, > + .detect = detect_chromeos_privacy_screen, > + }, > +#endif > }; > > void __init drm_privacy_screen_lookup_init(void) > -- > 2.34.1.307.g9b7440fafd-goog > Thanks. -- Dmitry
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> To: Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com> Cc: gwendal@google.com, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>, seanpaul@google.com, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>, rajatxjain@gmail.com, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, marcheau@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/privacy_screen_x86: Add entry for ChromeOS privacy-screen Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 11:50:25 -0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YcDegV8wqljpU3J0@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211217202850.1967594-2-rajatja@google.com> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 12:28:50PM -0800, Rajat Jain wrote: > Add a static entry in the x86 table, to detect and wait for > privacy-screen on some ChromeOS platforms. > > Please note that this means that if CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN is > enabled, and if "GOOG0010" device is found in ACPI, then the i915 probe > shall return EPROBE_DEFER until a platform driver actually registers the > privacy-screen: https://hansdegoede.livejournal.com/25948.html > > Signed-off-by: Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com> > --- > v2: * Use #if instead of #elif > * Reorder the patches in the series. > * Rebased on drm-tip > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > index a2cafb294ca6..0c5699ad70a3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_privacy_screen_x86.c > @@ -47,6 +47,18 @@ static bool __init detect_thinkpad_privacy_screen(void) > } > #endif > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN) > +static bool __init detect_chromeos_privacy_screen(void) Does marking this __init work in case there is a deferral? Can it happen that privacy screen is a module and so will get loaded only after we discarded __init sections. > +{ > + if (!acpi_dev_present("GOOG0010", NULL, -1)) > + return false; > + > + pr_info("%s: Need to wait for ChromeOS privacy-screen drvr", __func__); I still do not see how this message is helpful. If it is really desired, I'd put something into the code that calls into lookups. > + return true; > + > +} > +#endif > + > static const struct arch_init_data arch_init_data[] __initconst = { > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_THINKPAD_ACPI) > { > @@ -58,6 +70,16 @@ static const struct arch_init_data arch_init_data[] __initconst = { > .detect = detect_thinkpad_privacy_screen, > }, > #endif > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CHROMEOS_PRIVACY_SCREEN) > + { > + .lookup = { > + .dev_id = NULL, > + .con_id = NULL, > + .provider = "privacy_screen-GOOG0010:00", > + }, > + .detect = detect_chromeos_privacy_screen, > + }, > +#endif > }; > > void __init drm_privacy_screen_lookup_init(void) > -- > 2.34.1.307.g9b7440fafd-goog > Thanks. -- Dmitry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-20 19:50 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-12-17 20:28 [PATCH v2 1/2] platform/chrome: Add driver for ChromeOS privacy-screen Rajat Jain 2021-12-17 20:28 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/privacy_screen_x86: Add entry " Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 19:50 ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message] 2021-12-20 19:50 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 20:29 ` Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 20:29 ` Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 22:00 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 22:00 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 19:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] platform/chrome: Add driver " Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 19:42 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 20:21 ` Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 20:21 ` Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 22:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 22:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov 2021-12-20 23:31 ` Rajat Jain 2021-12-20 23:31 ` Rajat Jain
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=YcDegV8wqljpU3J0@google.com \ --to=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \ --cc=airlied@linux.ie \ --cc=bleung@chromium.org \ --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \ --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=gwendal@google.com \ --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \ --cc=marcheau@google.com \ --cc=mripard@kernel.org \ --cc=rajatja@google.com \ --cc=rajatxjain@gmail.com \ --cc=seanpaul@google.com \ --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \ /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.