From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751668AbdF1JZw (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jun 2017 05:25:52 -0400 Received: from smtprelay4.synopsys.com ([198.182.47.9]:55070 "EHLO smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751572AbdF1JZr (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jun 2017 05:25:47 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] [media] platform: Add Synopsys Designware HDMI RX Controller Driver To: Sylwester Nawrocki , Jose Abreu References: <314b7ae92c9924d0991e14ccad80ca937a2d7b07.1497978962.git.joabreu@synopsys.com> <2868c525-3edd-0fe1-cc6f-49a758f8c434@synopsys.com> <2153d8da-effc-fedd-a2ce-b1c9ee40a82c@kernel.org> CC: , , , Carlos Palminha , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Hans Verkuil From: Jose Abreu Message-ID: <31dbb0fb-6256-a609-856c-f92b4245e2e6@synopsys.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:25:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2153d8da-effc-fedd-a2ce-b1c9ee40a82c@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.107.19.63] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sylwester, On 27-06-2017 21:34, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > Hi Jose, > > On 06/27/2017 10:43 AM, Jose Abreu wrote: >> On 25-06-2017 22:13, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >>> On 06/20/2017 07:26 PM, Jose Abreu wrote: >>>> This is an initial submission for the Synopsys Designware HDMI RX >>>> Controller Driver. This driver interacts with a phy driver so that >>>> a communication between them is created and a video pipeline is >>>> configured. >>>> Signed-off-by: Jose Abreu >>>> +static int dw_hdmi_phy_init(struct dw_hdmi_dev *dw_dev) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct dw_phy_pdata *phy = &dw_dev->phy_config; >>>> + const struct of_device_id *of_id; >>>> + struct of_dev_auxdata lookup; >>> struct of_dev_auxdata lookup = { }; >>> >>> You could initialize to 0 here and... >>> >>>> + struct device_node *child; >>>> + const char *drvname; >>>> + int ret; >>>> + >>>> + child = dw_hdmi_get_phy_of_node(dw_dev, &of_id); >>>> + if (!child || !of_id || !of_id->data) { >>>> + dev_err(dw_dev->dev, "no supported phy found in DT\n"); >>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + drvname = of_id->data; >>>> + phy->funcs = &dw_hdmi_phy_funcs; >>>> + phy->funcs_arg = dw_dev; >>>> + >>>> + lookup.compatible = (char *)of_id->compatible; >>>> + lookup.phys_addr = 0x0; >>>> + lookup.name = NULL; >>> ...drop these two assignments. >> Ok. >> >>>> + lookup.platform_data = phy; >>>> + >>>> + request_module(drvname); >>> I'd say this request_module() is not needed when you use the v4l2-async >>> subnotifiers and the modules are properly installed in the file system. >>> I might be missing something though. >> Hmm, well I didn't actually test without request_module but I >> think its needed, otherwise I would have to do: >> >> modprobe phy_module >> modprobe controller_module >> >> With request_module I just have to do: >> >> modprobe controller_module > If you are sure you need it I'm not against that. But assuming you have udev > in your system it should also work like this, without request_module(): > > 1. modprobe controller_module -> phy device is created in the kernel, uevent sent > 2. udev receives uevent, finds matching module and does modprobe phy_module > > Remaining part is as before: phy_module registers the driver which gets matched with > phy device; probe() is called which registers v4l2 subdev which then is registered > to v4l2_device through the v4l2-async mechanism. > > All this assumes udev is running and modules are installed in /lib/modules/$(uname -r). > E.g. there should be your module alias as shown by modinfo phy_module in > /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/modules.alias. The modules are installed but I think I don't have udev :/ I'm running this on an embedded platform called ARC AXS and I'm using buildroot with minimal options. > >>>> + ret = of_platform_populate(dw_dev->of_node, NULL, &lookup, dw_dev->dev); >>>> + if (ret) { >>>> + dev_err(dw_dev->dev, "failed to populate phy driver\n"); >>>> + return ret; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +static void dw_hdmi_phy_exit(struct dw_hdmi_dev *dw_dev) >>>> +{ >>>> + of_platform_depopulate(dw_dev->dev); >>>> +} >>>> +static int dw_hdmi_v4l2_notify_complete(struct v4l2_async_notifier *notifier) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct dw_hdmi_dev *dw_dev = notifier_to_dw_dev(notifier); >>>> + int ret; >>>> + >>>> + ret = v4l2_device_register_subdev_nodes(&dw_dev->v4l2_dev); >>> There shouldn't be multiple struct v4l2_device instances, instead we should >>> have only one created by the main driver. AFAIU, in your case it would be >>> driver associated with the dw-hdmi-soc DT node. And normally such a top level >>> driver creates subdev device nodes when its all required sub-devices are >>> available. >>> >>> I think this patch could be useful for you: >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.linuxtv.org_patch_41834&d=DwICaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=WHDsc6kcWAl4i96Vm5hJ_19IJiuxx_p_Rzo2g-uHDKw&m=uNHRQkbP_-z8v5d30KFx9pcPEUhlr4ciWY3ZDAVExTA&s=dB9wpgeP7AJg1eDRty0-RKhq3DY-7J5srIzyVoJey5I&e= >>> >>> With that the dw-hdmi-soc driver would have it's v4l2-async notifier's >>> notify_complete() callback called only when both the hdmi-rx and the >>> hdmi-phy subdevs are registered. >> Yeah, I saw the patches. I just implemented this way because they >> are not merged yet, right? > I think these patches will be merged in v4.14-rc1, so together with your driver. > You could apply them locally and indicate that your series depends on them in > the cover letter. Ok, will apply them locally and re-test. > >>>> + if (ret) { >>>> + dev_err(dw_dev->dev, "failed to register subdev nodes\n"); >>>> + return ret; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> +static int dw_hdmi_rx_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> +{ >>>> + /* V4L2 initialization */ >>>> + sd = &dw_dev->sd; >>>> + v4l2_subdev_init(sd, &dw_hdmi_sd_ops); >>>> + strlcpy(sd->name, dev_name(dev), sizeof(sd->name)); >>>> + sd->dev = dev; >>>> + sd->internal_ops = &dw_hdmi_internal_ops; >>>> + sd->flags |= V4L2_SUBDEV_FL_HAS_EVENTS; >>> Don't you also need V4L2_SUBDEV_FL_HAS_DEVNODE flag set? >> Ouch. Yes I need otherwise the subdev will not be associated with >> the v4l2_device. > This flag indicates that the v4l2 subdev device node (/dev/v4l-subdev?) > should be created for this subdevice. Ok, will add for controller driver only then: I think for phy this should not be added because controller is responsible to manage phy entirely so creating a /dev/ which can be seen by userspace can lead to confusion, maybe? Best regards, Jose Miguel Abreu > > --- > Regards, > Sylwester >