lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 02/11] drm/gma500: Use drm_aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers
From
Hi

Am 12.01.23 um 10:59 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 10:04:48AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Am 11.01.23 um 16:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
>>> This one nukes all framebuffers, which is a bit much. In reality
>>> gma500 is igpu and never shipped with anything discrete, so there should
>>> not be any difference.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c
>>> index cd9c73f5a64a..9b0daf90dc50 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c
>>> @@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ static int psb_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)
>>> * TODO: Refactor psb_driver_load() to map vdc_reg earlier. Then we
>>> * might be able to read the framebuffer range from the device.
>>> */
>>> - ret = drm_aperture_remove_framebuffers(true, &driver);
>>> + ret = drm_aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers(pdev, &driver);
>>
>> This does not work. The comment just above the changed line explains why.
>> The device uses shared memory similar to other integrated Intel chips. The
>> console is somewhere in a 16 MiB range, which has been stolen by the BIOS
>> from main memory. There's only a 1 MiB memory range on the device to program
>> the device. Unless you want to refactor as described, this call has to cover
>> the whole memory for now.
>
> Uh. So it's maybe not so pretty, but what if I just call both functions?

That's ways more ugly IMHO.

> That way we get the vga handling through the pci one, and the "make sure
> there's no fb left" through the other one. Plus comment of course.
>
> Otherwise we'd need to somehow keep the vga stuff in the non-pci paths,
> and that just feels all kinds of wrong to me.

With your patch applied, aperture_detach_devices() does all the work of
removing. I'd add the following internal functions:

static void aperture_detach_head(bool is_primary)
{
/*
* lengthy comment here
*/
if (is_primary)
sysfb_disable()
}

static void aperture_detach_tail(bool remove_vga)
{
if (remove_vga) {
aperture_detach_devices(VGA_PHYS_)
vga_remove_vgacon()
}
}

And call both of them at the beginning/end of
aperture_remove_conflicting_devices() and
aperture_remove_conflicting_pci_devices().

You'd still need to primary argument to
aperture_remove_conflicting_devices(), but there will be no code
duplication with the aperture helpers and the purpose of each code
fragment will be clearer.

Best regards
Thomas

> -Daniel

--
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:37    [W:0.096 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site