From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>, Kate Hsuan <hpa@redhat.com>,
Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@gmail.com>,
Yury Luneff <yury.lunev@gmail.com>,
Nable <nable.maininbox@googlemail.com>,
andrey.i.trufanov@gmail.com, Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@gmail.com>,
Dan Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] media: atomisp: Add support for v4l2-async sensor registration
Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 23:30:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd1ijQM7b8Z2ip3TXJyuhQJfAqk0MNBVW-Q-ooi_-dBHw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230525190100.130010-2-hdegoede@redhat.com>
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 10:01 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Add support for using v4l2-async sensor registration.
>
> This has been tested with both the gc0310 and the ov2680 sensor drivers.
>
> Drivers must add the ACPI HIDs they match on to the supported_sensors[]
> array in the same commit as that they are converted to
> v4l2_async_register_subdev_sensor().
>
> Sensor drivers also must check they have a fwnode graph endpoint and return
> -EPROBE_DEFER from probe() if there is no endpoint yet. This guarantees
> that the GPIO mappingss are in place before the driver tries to get GPIOs.
mappings
> For now it also is still possible to use the old atomisp_gmin_platform
> based sensor drivers. This is mainly intended for testing while moving
> other sensor drivers over to runtime-pm + v4l2-async.
...
> +struct acpi_device;
> struct atomisp_device;
> -struct v4l2_device;
> struct atomisp_sub_device;
> +struct v4l2_device;
I would group atomisp* separately
struct acpi_device;
struct v4l2_device;
struct atomisp_device;
struct atomisp_sub_device;
...
> +struct atomisp_csi2_bridge {
> + char csi2_node_name[14];
> + struct software_node csi2_node;
Wondering if swapping these two saves some code (due to potential use
of container_of() for the node member).
> + u32 data_lanes[CSI2_MAX_LANES];
> + unsigned int n_sensors;
> + struct atomisp_csi2_sensor sensors[ATOMISP_CAMERA_NR_PORTS];
> +};
...
> +static char *gmin_cfg_get_dsm(struct acpi_device *adev, const char *key)
> +{
> + union acpi_object *obj, *key_el, *val_el;
> + char *val = NULL;
> + int i;
> +
> + obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(adev->handle, &atomisp_dsm_guid, 0, 0,
> + NULL, ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE);
> + if (!obj)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < obj->package.count - 1; i += 2) {
> + key_el = &obj->package.elements[i + 0];
> + val_el = &obj->package.elements[i + 1];
> +
> + if (key_el->type != ACPI_TYPE_STRING || val_el->type != ACPI_TYPE_STRING)
> + break;
> +
> + if (!strcmp(key_el->string.pointer, key)) {
> + val = kstrdup(val_el->string.pointer, GFP_KERNEL);
> + dev_info(&adev->dev, "Using DSM entry %s=%s\n", key, val);
Do we really want to have "(null)" to be printed in case of the
kstrdup() failure?
Also this code may become a honeypot for all possible static analyzers
and even if we don't care about NULL it may become noisy activity.
Besides that since we have a handle, wouldn't it be better to use
acpi_handle_info() here?
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + ACPI_FREE(obj);
> + return val;
> +}
...
> + dev_info(&adev->dev, "Using DMI entry %s=%s\n", key, gv->val);
acpi_handle_info() ?
Note, I'm fine with dev_info() in both cases, just asking.
...
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object_typed(adev->handle, "_PR0", NULL, &buffer, ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE);
> + if (!ACPI_SUCCESS(status))
ACPI_FAILURE()
> + return -ENOENT;
...
> + /*
> + * Get pmc-clock number from ACPI _PR0 method and compare this to
PMC ?
> + * the CsiPort 1 pmc-clock used in the CHT/BYT reference designs.
Ditto.
> + */
...
> + obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(adev->handle, &intel_sensor_module_guid,
> + 0x00, 0x01, NULL, ACPI_TYPE_STRING);
0x01 here...
> + if (obj) {
> + dev_info(&adev->dev, "Sensor module id: '%s'\n", obj->string.pointer);
> + ACPI_FREE(obj);
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * First get the GPIO-settings count and then get count GPIO-settings
> + * values. Note the order of these may differ from the order in which
> + * the GPIOs are listed on the ACPI resources! So we first store them all
> + * and then enumerate the ACPI resources and match them up by pin number.
> + */
> + obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(adev->handle,
> + &intel_sensor_gpio_info_guid, 0x00, 1,
...and 1 here. Wouldn't it make sense to be consistent and use either
hex or decimal (looking into below code decimal looks more plausible)
in both cases?
> + NULL, ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER);
> + if (!obj)
> + return dev_err_probe(&adev->dev, -EIO, "No _DSM entry for GPIO pin count\n");
...
> + /* Since we match up by pin-number the pin-numbers must be unique */
> + for (i = 0; i < data.settings_count; i++) {
> + for (j = i + 1; j < data.settings_count; j++) {
> + if (INTEL_GPIO_DSM_PIN(data.settings[i]) !=
> + INTEL_GPIO_DSM_PIN(data.settings[j]))
> + continue;
Wondering if we can have pure pin numbers in some (bit)array, in that
case the uniqueness can be achieved by the test_bit() call in O(1).
> + return dev_err_probe(&adev->dev, -EIO, "Duplicate pin number %lu\n",
> + INTEL_GPIO_DSM_PIN(data.settings[i]));
> + }
> + }
...
> + for_each_acpi_dev_match(adev, cfg->hid, NULL, -1) {
> + if (!adev->status.enabled)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (bridge->n_sensors >= ATOMISP_CAMERA_NR_PORTS) {
> + dev_err(isp->dev, "Exceeded available CSI2 ports\n");
> + ret = -EINVAL;
EOVERFLOW ? EEXIST? ENOMEM
(EINVAL is fine, but to me it's too much use of the same code in the kernel)
> + goto err_put_adev;
> + }
> + }
...
> + /*
> + * This function is intended to run only once and then leave
> + * the created nodes attached even after a rmmod, therefor:
Some spellcheckers want "therefore" here.
> + * 1. The bridge memory is leaked deliberately on success
> + * 2. If a secondary fwnode is already set exit early.
> + */
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-26 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-25 19:00 [PATCH v2 0/5] media: atomisp: Add support for v4l2-async sensor registration Hans de Goede
2023-05-25 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] " Hans de Goede
2023-05-26 20:30 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2023-05-27 9:25 ` Hans de Goede
2023-05-27 10:26 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-05-25 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] media: atomisp: ov2680: Turn into standard v4l2 sensor driver Hans de Goede
2023-07-05 13:34 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-05-25 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] media: atomisp: gc0310: " Hans de Goede
2023-07-05 13:45 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-07-06 6:37 ` Jacopo Mondi
2023-07-06 6:43 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-07-06 7:17 ` Jacopo Mondi
2023-07-06 7:20 ` Sakari Ailus
2023-05-25 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] media: atomisp: Drop v4l2_get_acpi_sensor_info() function Hans de Goede
2023-05-25 19:01 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] media: Move gc0310 sensor drivers to drivers/media/i2c/ Hans de Goede
2023-05-26 21:23 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] media: atomisp: Add support for v4l2-async sensor registration Andy Shevchenko
2023-05-27 15:54 ` Hans de Goede
2024-04-30 10:32 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-04-30 11:51 ` Hans de Goede
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=CAHp75Vd1ijQM7b8Z2ip3TXJyuhQJfAqk0MNBVW-Q-ooi_-dBHw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrey.i.trufanov@gmail.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=djrscally@gmail.com \
--cc=fabioaiuto83@gmail.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@redhat.com \
--cc=kitakar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=nable.maininbox@googlemail.com \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yury.lunev@gmail.com \
/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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).