From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A95644F8A7 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 01:18:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705972739; cv=none; b=kCfeaVUD340UnJHe5uQkPNmGYXU+3KNudUp6yEC8K2CAmV8YtqfkTvhvZakyd5N8+8SvWAJyic9mUzkZcu5Sm6qGVqNxye8NHhkkzeF4dZ0IU9U1SaxJexKzpEdQJAKS5nZalIe3mArxQL3a96KHAUJwZ4rGkSXHClnXTPhFW1k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705972739; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Po4T/IjGZp1UTUz0bKFVpijLYioCAg8MTsY3sk6USfo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RDaEu1pdG79nYoWsCu/4JozerQWS1Otd3wICFrtPPxXzj3ff5w7BdFI6gD6gNbS4lZeSM2DFxDA7h0jQNufVLnp7bumP/OPPLqjEUP6Zz2mOEBUhmBpG8sJjlu/lmWGg9zNxxhqYmpqh1D+xNdD5vXagMw00J1q8qBKrtB9V1dA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=LHbgaoIP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="LHbgaoIP" Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (89-27-53-110.bb.dnainternet.fi [89.27.53.110]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99AFCE4; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 02:17:42 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1705972662; bh=Po4T/IjGZp1UTUz0bKFVpijLYioCAg8MTsY3sk6USfo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=LHbgaoIPK+K+PeU6wOnWRvRtz9lkLUvvnWj43z7RMlqYToyeb6vwSDCAtvtj3IW+p hJf6UBdrEibznY38sXerc87XxxewewdwAI/pVEZnGWIyqOgJlMHv75GlsiXc6CLb9I 8U9K+MR/BJxDkzZQ81QPDTD90qWThLc5uz8+/ZZ8= Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 03:18:59 +0200 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Sui Jingfeng Cc: David Airlie , Neil Armstrong , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , Daniel Vetter , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] drm/bridge: simple-bridge: Allow acquiring the next bridge with fwnode API Message-ID: <20240123011859.GB22880@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20240122163220.110788-1-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> <20240122163220.110788-4-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240122163220.110788-4-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:18AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > Which make it possible to use this driver on non-DT based systems, > meanwhile, made no functional changes for DT based systems. > > Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > index 595f672745b9..cfea5a67cc5b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > @@ -184,6 +184,39 @@ static const void *simple_bridge_get_match_data(const struct device *dev) > return NULL; > } > > +static int simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(struct device *dev, > + struct drm_bridge **next_bridge) > +{ > + struct drm_bridge *bridge; > + struct fwnode_handle *ep; > + struct fwnode_handle *remote; > + > + ep = fwnode_graph_get_endpoint_by_id(dev->fwnode, 1, 0, 0); > + if (!ep) { > + dev_err(dev, "The endpoint is unconnected\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + remote = fwnode_graph_get_remote_port_parent(ep); > + fwnode_handle_put(ep); > + if (!remote) { > + dev_err(dev, "No valid remote node\n"); > + return -ENODEV; > + } > + > + bridge = drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode(remote); > + fwnode_handle_put(remote); > + > + if (!bridge) { > + dev_warn(dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > + return -EPROBE_DEFER; > + } > + > + *next_bridge = bridge; > + > + return 0; > +} > + Hmmmm yes, this convinces me further that we should switch to fwnode, not implement fwnode and OF side-by-side. > static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > struct simple_bridge *sbridge; > @@ -199,14 +232,17 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > else > sbridge->info = simple_bridge_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); > > - /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > - if (!remote) > - return -EINVAL; > - > - sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > - of_node_put(remote); > + if (pdev->dev.of_node) { > + /* Get the next bridge in the pipeline. */ > + remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(pdev->dev.of_node, 1, -1); > + if (!remote) > + return -EINVAL; > > + sbridge->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > + of_node_put(remote); > + } else { > + simple_bridge_get_next_bridge_by_fwnode(&pdev->dev, &sbridge->next_bridge); > + } > if (!sbridge->next_bridge) { > dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Next bridge not found, deferring probe\n"); > return -EPROBE_DEFER; > @@ -231,6 +267,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > /* Register the bridge. */ > sbridge->bridge.funcs = &simple_bridge_bridge_funcs; > sbridge->bridge.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; > + sbridge->bridge.fwnode = pdev->dev.fwnode; > sbridge->bridge.timings = sbridge->info->timings; > > drm_bridge_add(&sbridge->bridge); > -- > 2.25.1 > -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart