From: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] firmware: sysfb: Add helpers to unregister a pdev and disable registration
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 14:02:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ed69d1-ebea-c9d0-45be-3c6c7e5ea1e5@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220511112438.1251024-3-javierm@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6615 bytes --]
Am 11.05.22 um 13:24 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
> These can be used by subsystems to unregister a platform device registered
> by sysfb and also to disable future platform device registration in sysfb.
>
> Suggested-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> ---
>
> (no changes since v4)
>
> Changes in v4:
> - Make sysfb_disable() to also attempt to unregister a device.
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Add kernel-doc comments and include in other_interfaces.rst (Daniel Vetter).
>
> .../driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst | 6 ++
> drivers/firmware/sysfb.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/sysfb.h | 19 ++++
> 3 files changed, 106 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
> index b81794e0cfbb..06ac89adaafb 100644
> --- a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
> @@ -13,6 +13,12 @@ EDD Interfaces
> .. kernel-doc:: drivers/firmware/edd.c
> :internal:
>
> +Generic System Framebuffers Interface
> +-------------------------------------
> +
> +.. kernel-doc:: drivers/firmware/sysfb.c
> + :export:
> +
> Intel Stratix10 SoC Service Layer
> ---------------------------------
> Some features of the Intel Stratix10 SoC require a level of privilege
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/sysfb.c b/drivers/firmware/sysfb.c
> index b032f40a92de..6768968949e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/sysfb.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/sysfb.c
> @@ -34,21 +34,92 @@
> #include <linux/screen_info.h>
> #include <linux/sysfb.h>
>
> +static struct platform_device *pd;
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(disable_lock);
> +static bool disabled;
> +
> +static bool sysfb_unregister(void)
> +{
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pd))
> + return false;
> +
> + platform_device_unregister(pd);
> + pd = NULL;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * sysfb_disable() - disable the Generic System Framebuffers support
> + *
> + * This disables the registration of system framebuffer devices that match the
> + * generic drivers that make use of the system framebuffer set up by firmware.
> + *
> + * It also unregisters a device if this was already registered by sysfb_init().
Why? I still cannot wrap my mind around, why we need to store *pd at all
and use sysfb_try_unregister() for unregistering.
> + *
> + * Context: The function can sleep. A @disable_lock mutex is acquired to serialize
> + * against sysfb_init(), that registers a system framebuffer device and
> + * sysfb_try_unregister(), that tries to unregister a framebuffer device.
> + */
> +void sysfb_disable(void)
> +{
> + mutex_lock(&disable_lock);
> + sysfb_unregister();
> + disabled = true;
> + mutex_unlock(&disable_lock);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sysfb_disable);
> +
> +/**
> + * sysfb_try_unregister() - attempt to unregister a system framebuffer device
> + * @dev: device to unregister
> + *
> + * This tries to unregister a system framebuffer device if this was registered
> + * by the Generic System Framebuffers. The device will only be unregistered if
> + * it was registered by sysfb_init(), otherwise it will not be unregistered.
> + *
> + * Context: The function can sleep. a @load_lock mutex is acquired to serialize
> + * against sysfb_init(), that registers a simple framebuffer device and
> + * sysfb_disable(), that disables the Generic System Framebuffers support.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * * true - the device was unregistered successfully
> + * * false - the device was not unregistered
> + */
> +bool sysfb_try_unregister(struct device *dev)
As it stands, I strongly object the use of this function as still don't
really get the purpose. It looks like a glorified wrapper around
platform_device_unregister(). Do we need disable_lock to serialize with
something else?
Best regards
Thomas
> +{
> + bool ret = false;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&disable_lock);
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pd) || pd != to_platform_device(dev))
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> +
> + ret = sysfb_unregister();
> +
> +unlock_mutex:
> + mutex_unlock(&disable_lock);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sysfb_try_unregister);
> +
> static __init int sysfb_init(void)
> {
> struct screen_info *si = &screen_info;
> struct simplefb_platform_data mode;
> - struct platform_device *pd;
> const char *name;
> bool compatible;
> - int ret;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&disable_lock);
> + if (disabled)
> + goto unlock_mutex;
>
> /* try to create a simple-framebuffer device */
> compatible = sysfb_parse_mode(si, &mode);
> if (compatible) {
> pd = sysfb_create_simplefb(si, &mode);
> if (!IS_ERR(pd))
> - return 0;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> }
>
> /* if the FB is incompatible, create a legacy framebuffer device */
> @@ -60,8 +131,10 @@ static __init int sysfb_init(void)
> name = "platform-framebuffer";
>
> pd = platform_device_alloc(name, 0);
> - if (!pd)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + if (!pd) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> + }
>
> sysfb_apply_efi_quirks(pd);
>
> @@ -73,9 +146,11 @@ static __init int sysfb_init(void)
> if (ret)
> goto err;
>
> - return 0;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> err:
> platform_device_put(pd);
> +unlock_mutex:
> + mutex_unlock(&disable_lock);
> return ret;
> }
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sysfb.h b/include/linux/sysfb.h
> index 708152e9037b..e8c0313fac8f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sysfb.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sysfb.h
> @@ -55,6 +55,25 @@ struct efifb_dmi_info {
> int flags;
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFB
> +
> +void sysfb_disable(void);
> +bool sysfb_try_unregister(struct device *dev);
> +
> +#else /* CONFIG_SYSFB */
> +
> +static inline void sysfb_disable(void)
> +{
> +
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool sysfb_try_unregister(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_SYSFB */
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_EFI
>
> extern struct efifb_dmi_info efifb_dmi_list[];
--
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-11 12:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-11 11:24 [PATCH v5 0/7] Fix some races between sysfb device registration and drivers probe Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:24 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] firmware: sysfb: Make sysfb_create_simplefb() return a pdev pointer Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 12:04 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:24 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] firmware: sysfb: Add helpers to unregister a pdev and disable registration Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:54 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-11 12:01 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 12:05 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-11 12:29 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 12:02 ` Thomas Zimmermann [this message]
2022-05-11 12:24 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:30 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] fbdev: Restart conflicting fb removal loop when unregistering devices Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:47 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-11 11:57 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-13 12:28 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:31 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] fbdev: Make sysfb to unregister its own registered devices Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:31 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] fbdev: Disable sysfb device registration when removing conflicting FBs Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-06-07 15:01 ` Daniel Vetter
2022-06-07 15:41 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:32 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] Revert "fbdev: Prevent probing generic drivers if a FB is already registered" Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 11:32 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] fbdev: Make registered_fb[] private to fbmem.c Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-11 17:00 ` Sam Ravnborg
2022-05-11 17:17 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-05-11 17:34 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-12 18:32 ` Sam Ravnborg
2022-05-13 10:48 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Fix some races between sysfb device registration and drivers probe Thomas Zimmermann
2022-05-13 11:10 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-05-13 11:32 ` Thomas Zimmermann
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=67ed69d1-ebea-c9d0-45be-3c6c7e5ea1e5@suse.de \
--to=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=javierm@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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: 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).