On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 04:11:06PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote: > Maxime Ripard writes: > > > Hi! > > > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 01:47:13PM +0000, Mans Rullgard wrote: > >> Sometimes it is desirabled to use a separate i2c controller for ddc > >> access. This adds support for the ddc-i2c-bus property of the > >> hdmi-connector node, using the specified controller if provided. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard > >> --- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h | 1 + > >> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h > >> index b685ee11623d..b08c4453d47c 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi.h > >> @@ -269,6 +269,7 @@ struct sun4i_hdmi { > >> struct clk *tmds_clk; > >> > >> struct i2c_adapter *i2c; > >> + struct i2c_adapter *ddc_i2c; > >> > >> /* Regmap fields for I2C adapter */ > >> struct regmap_field *field_ddc_en; > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c > >> index 061d2e0d9011..5b2fac79f5d6 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i_hdmi_enc.c > >> @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector) > >> struct edid *edid; > >> int ret; > >> > >> - edid = drm_get_edid(connector, hdmi->i2c); > >> + edid = drm_get_edid(connector, hdmi->ddc_i2c ?: hdmi->i2c); > > > > You can't test whether ddc_i2c is NULL or not... > > > >> if (!edid) > >> return 0; > >> > >> @@ -228,6 +228,28 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_get_modes(struct drm_connector *connector) > >> return ret; > >> } > >> > >> +static struct i2c_adapter *sun4i_hdmi_get_ddc(struct device *dev) > >> +{ > >> + struct device_node *phandle, *remote; > >> + struct i2c_adapter *ddc; > >> + > >> + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, -1); > >> + if (!remote) > >> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > >> + > >> + phandle = of_parse_phandle(remote, "ddc-i2c-bus", 0); > >> + of_node_put(remote); > >> + if (!phandle) > >> + return NULL; > >> + > >> + ddc = of_get_i2c_adapter_by_node(phandle); > >> + of_node_put(phandle); > >> + if (!ddc) > >> + return ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER); > >> + > >> + return ddc; > > > > ... Since even in (most) error cases you're returning a !NULL pointer. > > > >> +} > >> + > >> static const struct drm_connector_helper_funcs sun4i_hdmi_connector_helper_funcs = { > >> .get_modes = sun4i_hdmi_get_modes, > >> }; > >> @@ -575,6 +597,12 @@ static int sun4i_hdmi_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master, > >> goto err_disable_mod_clk; > >> } > >> > >> + hdmi->ddc_i2c = sun4i_hdmi_get_ddc(dev); > >> + if (IS_ERR(hdmi->ddc_i2c)) { > > ... which is checked here. > > The property is optional, so the idea was to return null in that case > and use the built-in controller. If the property exists but some error > occurs, we want to abort rather than proceed with the fallback which > almost certainly won't work. > > Maybe I got something wrong in that logic. Indeed, I just got confused. I guess returning ENODEV in such a case, and testing for that, would make things more obvious. Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com