linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] fbdev: Disable sysfb device registration when removing conflicting FBs
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 17:01:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yp9oLJ/HD2rHxO3z@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220511113144.1252729-1-javierm@redhat.com>

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> The platform devices registered by sysfb match with firmware-based DRM or
> fbdev drivers, that are used to have early graphics using a framebuffer
> provided by the system firmware.
> 
> DRM or fbdev drivers later are probed and remove all conflicting framebuffers,
> leading to these platform devices for generic drivers to be unregistered.
> 
> But the current solution has a race, since the sysfb_init() function could
> be called after a DRM or fbdev driver is probed and request to unregister
> the devices for drivers with conflicting framebuffes.
> 
> To prevent this, disable any future sysfb platform device registration by
> calling sysfb_disable(), if a driver requests to remove the conflicting
> framebuffers.
> 
> 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>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v5:
> - Move the sysfb_disable() call at conflicting framebuffers again to
>   avoid the need of a DRIVER_FIRMWARE capability flag.
> - Add Daniel Vetter's Reviewed-by tag again since reverted to the old
>   patch that he already reviewed in v2.
> 
> Changes in v3:
> - Call sysfb_disable() when a DRM dev and a fbdev are registered rather
>   than when conflicting framebuffers are removed (Thomas Zimmermann).
> - Call sysfb_disable() when a fbdev framebuffer is registered rather
>   than when conflicting framebuffers are removed (Thomas Zimmermann).
> - Drop Daniel Vetter's Reviewed-by tag since patch changed a lot.
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - Explain in the commit message that fbmem has to unregister the device
>   as fallback if a driver registered the device itself (Daniel Vetter).
> - Also explain that fallback in a comment in the code (Daniel Vetter).
> - Don't encode in fbmem the assumption that sysfb will always register
>   platform devices (Daniel Vetter).
> - Add a FIXME comment about drivers registering devices (Daniel Vetter).
> 
>  drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> index 9b035ef4d552..265efa189bcc 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> @@ -1789,6 +1789,17 @@ int remove_conflicting_framebuffers(struct apertures_struct *a,
>  	if (do_free)
>  		kfree(a);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * If a driver asked to unregister a platform device registered by
> +	 * sysfb, then can be assumed that this is a driver for a display
> +	 * that is set up by the system firmware and has a generic driver.
> +	 *
> +	 * Drivers for devices that don't have a generic driver will never
> +	 * ask for this, so let's assume that a real driver for the display
> +	 * was already probed and prevent sysfb to register devices later.
> +	 */
> +	sysfb_disable();

So the og version had (or should have had at least) the sysfb_disable()
call before we go through the loop and try to unregister stuff. I think
this needs to be done before we call do_remove_conflicting_framebuffer()
instead. With that:

Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>


> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(remove_conflicting_framebuffers);
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-07 15:01 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
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 [this message]
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=Yp9oLJ/HD2rHxO3z@phenom.ffwll.local \
    --to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=deller@gmx.de \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=javierm@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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: 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).