From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
To: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, hverkuil@xs4all.nl,
laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] ipu3-cio2: Parse information from firmware without using callbacks
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:57:42 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190628115742.iw3v2kh4crvquitf@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190614163142.uoj6bg27js5gks3w@uno.localdomain>
Hi Jacopo,
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 06:31:42PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> Hi Sakari,
>
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:02:25PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Instead of using the convenience function
> > v4l2_async_notifier_parse_fwnode_endpoints(), parse the endpoints and set
> > up the async sub-devices without using callbacks. While this adds a little
> > bit of code, it makes parsing the endpoints quite a bit more simple and
> > gives more control to the driver over the process. The parsing assumes
> > D-PHY instead of letting the V4L2 fwnode framework guess it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/ipu3-cio2.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/ipu3-cio2.c b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/ipu3-cio2.c
> > index 690d3bd08ddd..40e8b8617f55 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/ipu3-cio2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu3/ipu3-cio2.c
> > @@ -1475,36 +1475,51 @@ static const struct v4l2_async_notifier_operations cio2_async_ops = {
> > .complete = cio2_notifier_complete,
> > };
> >
> > -static int cio2_fwnode_parse(struct device *dev,
> > - struct v4l2_fwnode_endpoint *vep,
> > - struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd)
> > +static int cio2_parse_firmware(struct cio2_device *cio2)
> > {
> > - struct sensor_async_subdev *s_asd =
> > - container_of(asd, struct sensor_async_subdev, asd);
> > + unsigned int i;
> > + int ret;
> >
> > - if (vep->bus_type != V4L2_MBUS_CSI2_DPHY) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "Only CSI2 bus type is currently supported\n");
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > - }
> > + for (i = 0; i < CIO2_NUM_PORTS; i++) {
> > + struct v4l2_fwnode_endpoint vep = {
> > + .bus_type = V4L2_MBUS_CSI2_DPHY
> > + };
> > + struct sensor_async_subdev *s_asd = NULL;
> > + struct fwnode_handle *ep;
> >
> > - s_asd->csi2.port = vep->base.port;
> > - s_asd->csi2.lanes = vep->bus.mipi_csi2.num_data_lanes;
> > + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(
> > + dev_fwnode(&cio2->pci_dev->dev), i, 0,
> > + FWNODE_GRAPH_ENDPOINT_NEXT);
> >
> > - return 0;
> > -}
> > + if (!ep)
> > + continue;
> >
> > -static int cio2_notifier_init(struct cio2_device *cio2)
> > -{
> > - int ret;
> > + ret = v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_parse(ep, &vep);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_parse;
> >
> > - v4l2_async_notifier_init(&cio2->notifier);
> > + s_asd = kzalloc(sizeof(*s_asd), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!s_asd) {
> > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> > + goto err_parse;
> > + }
> >
> > - ret = v4l2_async_notifier_parse_fwnode_endpoints(
>
> How would you feel trying to remove this function completely? There
> are only 2 users mainline (rcar-vin and sunxi) and this is 'yet
> another way to parse an endpoint and add it to a notifier async list'.
>
> I would say, stabilizing on the use of one of the three
> v4l2_async_notifier_add_ versions could be desirable...
I agree. The reason I didn't do it in this patchset is that I have no
hardware to test. I'd like to get in what I can test first.
>
> > - &cio2->pci_dev->dev, &cio2->notifier,
> > - sizeof(struct sensor_async_subdev),
> > - cio2_fwnode_parse);
> > - if (ret < 0)
> > - goto out;
> > + s_asd->csi2.port = vep.base.port;
> > + s_asd->csi2.lanes = vep.bus.mipi_csi2.num_data_lanes;
> > +
> > + ret = v4l2_async_notifier_add_fwnode_remote_subdev(
> > + &cio2->notifier, ep, &s_asd->asd);
> > + fwnode_handle_put(ep);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_parse;
> > +
> > + continue;
> > +
> > +err_parse:
> > + fwnode_handle_put(ep);
>
> Won't the notifier cleanup put this device node for us?
There was an error so no. But we already did so before checking for the
error. Good catch! ;)
>
> This apart, for the patch itself:
> Reviewed-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
>
> Thanks
> j
>
> > + kfree(s_asd);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Proceed even without sensors connected to allow the device to
> > @@ -1512,25 +1527,13 @@ static int cio2_notifier_init(struct cio2_device *cio2)
> > */
> > cio2->notifier.ops = &cio2_async_ops;
> > ret = v4l2_async_notifier_register(&cio2->v4l2_dev, &cio2->notifier);
> > - if (ret) {
> > + if (ret)
> > dev_err(&cio2->pci_dev->dev,
> > "failed to register async notifier : %d\n", ret);
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > -
> > -out:
> > - if (ret)
> > - v4l2_async_notifier_cleanup(&cio2->notifier);
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static void cio2_notifier_exit(struct cio2_device *cio2)
> > -{
> > - v4l2_async_notifier_unregister(&cio2->notifier);
> > - v4l2_async_notifier_cleanup(&cio2->notifier);
> > -}
> > -
> > /**************** Queue initialization ****************/
> > static const struct media_entity_operations cio2_media_ops = {
> > .link_validate = v4l2_subdev_link_validate,
> > @@ -1814,16 +1817,18 @@ static int cio2_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
> > if (r)
> > goto fail_v4l2_device_unregister;
> >
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_init(&cio2->notifier);
> > +
> > /* Register notifier for subdevices we care */
> > - r = cio2_notifier_init(cio2);
> > + r = cio2_parse_firmware(cio2);
> > if (r)
> > - goto fail_cio2_queue_exit;
> > + goto fail_clean_notifier;
> >
> > r = devm_request_irq(&pci_dev->dev, pci_dev->irq, cio2_irq,
> > IRQF_SHARED, CIO2_NAME, cio2);
> > if (r) {
> > dev_err(&pci_dev->dev, "failed to request IRQ (%d)\n", r);
> > - goto fail;
> > + goto fail_clean_notifier;
> > }
> >
> > pm_runtime_put_noidle(&pci_dev->dev);
> > @@ -1831,9 +1836,9 @@ static int cio2_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > -fail:
> > - cio2_notifier_exit(cio2);
> > -fail_cio2_queue_exit:
> > +fail_clean_notifier:
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_unregister(&cio2->notifier);
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_cleanup(&cio2->notifier);
> > cio2_queues_exit(cio2);
> > fail_v4l2_device_unregister:
> > v4l2_device_unregister(&cio2->v4l2_dev);
> > @@ -1852,7 +1857,8 @@ static void cio2_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pci_dev)
> > struct cio2_device *cio2 = pci_get_drvdata(pci_dev);
> >
> > media_device_unregister(&cio2->media_dev);
> > - cio2_notifier_exit(cio2);
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_unregister(&cio2->notifier);
> > + v4l2_async_notifier_cleanup(&cio2->notifier);
> > cio2_queues_exit(cio2);
> > cio2_fbpt_exit_dummy(cio2);
> > v4l2_device_unregister(&cio2->v4l2_dev);
> > --
> > 2.11.0
> >
--
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-28 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-06 13:02 [PATCH v2 0/9] Rework V4L2 fwnode parsing; add defaults and avoid iteration Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] davinci-vpif: Don't dereference endpoint after putting it, fix refcounting Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] v4l2-async: Use endpoint node, not device node, for fwnode match Sakari Ailus
2019-06-14 15:45 ` Jacopo Mondi
2019-06-14 21:21 ` Niklas Söderlund
2019-06-21 9:19 ` Jacopo Mondi
2019-06-21 11:43 ` Niklas Söderlund
2019-06-28 8:29 ` Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] v4l2-async: Get fwnode reference when putting it to the notifier's list Sakari Ailus
2019-06-14 16:01 ` Jacopo Mondi
2019-06-28 11:35 ` Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] v4l2-async: Add v4l2_async_notifier_add_fwnode_remote_subdev Sakari Ailus
2019-06-14 16:14 ` Jacopo Mondi
2019-06-28 11:47 ` Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] omap3isp: Rework OF endpoint parsing Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] v4l2-async: Safely clean up an uninitialised notifier Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] ipu3-cio2: Clean up notifier's subdev list if parsing endpoints fails Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] ipu3-cio2: Proceed with notifier init even if there are no subdevs Sakari Ailus
2019-06-06 13:02 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] ipu3-cio2: Parse information from firmware without using callbacks Sakari Ailus
2019-06-14 16:31 ` Jacopo Mondi
2019-06-28 11:57 ` Sakari Ailus [this message]
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=20190628115742.iw3v2kh4crvquitf@paasikivi.fi.intel.com \
--to=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
--cc=jacopo@jmondi.org \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).