[PATCH v6 1/2] video: support MIPI-DSI controller driver

[Donghwa Lee]

On Thu, 19 Jan 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:03:56 +0900
> Donghwa Lee <dh09.lee at samsung.com> wrote:
> 
>> Samsung S5PC210 and EXYNOS SoC platform has MIPI-DSI controller and MIPI-DSI
>> based LCD Panel could be used with it. This patch supports MIPI-DSI driver
>> based Samsung SoC chip.
>>
>> LCD panel driver based MIPI-DSI should be registered to MIPI-DSI driver at
>> machine code and LCD panel driver specific function registered to mipi_dsim_ddi
>> structure at lcd panel init function called system init.
>> In the MIPI-DSI driver, find lcd panel driver by using registered
>> lcd panel name, and then initialize lcd panel driver.
>>
> 
> The code looks nice to me.  I assume that Florian will be processing
> the patch?
> 
> A few minor comments:
> 


Thank you for your comments. I will send corrected next version patch set.

>>
>> ...
>>
>> +#define master_to_driver(a)	(a->dsim_lcd_drv)
>> +#define master_to_device(a)	(a->dsim_lcd_dev)
>> +#define dev_to_dsim(a)		platform_get_drvdata(to_platform_device(a))
> 
> These aren't very type-safe: can be called on any struct whcih has a
> field called "dsim_lcd_drv".  Also the "a" should be parenthesized to
> prevent obscure compile problems.
> 
> Really, it's best to do away with all such problems by implementing
> these helpers in C rather than in cpp!
> 


Yes, you're right. I will fix it next version patch set.

>>
>> ...
>>
>> +int s5p_mipi_dsi_register_lcd_device(struct mipi_dsim_lcd_device *lcd_dev)
>> +{
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_ddi *dsim_ddi;
>> +
>> +	if (!lcd_dev) {
>> +		pr_err("mipi_dsim_lcd_device is NULL.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +	}
> 
> Can this happen?  If not then BUG() is more appropriate.  Or just
> remove the code altogether and let the kernel oops.
> 


Maybe I think it can't happen. I will remove it.

> 
>> +	if (!lcd_dev->name) {
>> +		pr_err("dsim_lcd_device name is NULL.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +	}
> 
> Ditto.
> 
>> +	dsim_ddi = kzalloc(sizeof(struct mipi_dsim_ddi), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!dsim_ddi) {
>> +		pr_err("failed to allocate dsim_ddi object.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
> 
> Should be ENOMEM.
> 


Yes, I agree with you. 

>> +	}
>> +
>> +	dsim_ddi->dsim_lcd_dev = lcd_dev;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&mipi_dsim_lock);
>> +	list_add_tail(&dsim_ddi->list, &dsim_ddi_list);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&mipi_dsim_lock);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +struct mipi_dsim_ddi
>> +	*s5p_mipi_dsi_find_lcd_device(struct mipi_dsim_lcd_driver *lcd_drv)
> 
> Strange code layout.
> 


Yes, 

>> +{
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_ddi *dsim_ddi, *next;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_lcd_device *lcd_dev;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&mipi_dsim_lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(dsim_ddi, next, &dsim_ddi_list, list) {
>> +		if (!dsim_ddi)
>> +			goto out;
>> +
>> +		lcd_dev = dsim_ddi->dsim_lcd_dev;
>> +		if (!lcd_dev)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		if ((strcmp(lcd_drv->name, lcd_dev->name)) == 0) {
> 
> hm, using strcmp() to compare devices in this way looks fishy.  But I
> don't know what is going on here.
> 


This mipi dsi driver may have one or more lcd driver. So, this function can find 
appropriate lcd driver by using strcmp().

>> +			/**
>> +			 * bus_id would be used to identify
>> +			 * connected bus.
>> +			 */
>> +			dsim_ddi->bus_id = lcd_dev->bus_id;
>> +			mutex_unlock(&mipi_dsim_lock);
>> +
>> +			return dsim_ddi;
>> +		}
>> +
>> +		list_del(&dsim_ddi->list);
>> +		kfree(dsim_ddi);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +out:
>> +	mutex_unlock(&mipi_dsim_lock);
>> +
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int s5p_mipi_dsi_register_lcd_driver(struct mipi_dsim_lcd_driver *lcd_drv)
>> +{
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_ddi *dsim_ddi;
>> +
>> +	if (!lcd_drv) {
>> +		pr_err("mipi_dsim_lcd_driver is NULL.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (!lcd_drv->name) {
>> +		pr_err("dsim_lcd_driver name is NULL.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	dsim_ddi = s5p_mipi_dsi_find_lcd_device(lcd_drv);
>> +	if (!dsim_ddi) {
>> +		pr_err("mipi_dsim_ddi object not found.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
>> +	}
> 
> Boy, someone really likes EFAULT!
> 


Ok, I will fix it.

>> +	dsim_ddi->dsim_lcd_drv = lcd_drv;
>> +
>> +	pr_info("registered panel driver(%s) to mipi-dsi driver.\n",
>> +		lcd_drv->name);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +
>> +}
>> +
>> +struct mipi_dsim_ddi
>> +	*s5p_mipi_dsi_bind_lcd_ddi(struct mipi_dsim_device *dsim,
>> +			const char *name)
> 
> More code layout oddness.
> 
>> +{
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_ddi *dsim_ddi, *next;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_lcd_driver *lcd_drv;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_lcd_device *lcd_dev;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&dsim->lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(dsim_ddi, next, &dsim_ddi_list, list) {
>> +		lcd_drv = dsim_ddi->dsim_lcd_drv;
>> +		lcd_dev = dsim_ddi->dsim_lcd_dev;
>> +		if (!lcd_drv || !lcd_dev ||
>> +			(dsim->id != dsim_ddi->bus_id))
>> +				continue;
>> +
>> +		dev_dbg(dsim->dev, "lcd_drv->id = %d, lcd_dev->id = %d\n",
>> +				lcd_drv->id, lcd_dev->id);
>> +		dev_dbg(dsim->dev, "lcd_dev->bus_id = %d, dsim->id = %d\n",
>> +				lcd_dev->bus_id, dsim->id);
>> +
>> +		if ((strcmp(lcd_drv->name, name) == 0)) {
>> +			lcd_dev->master = dsim;
>> +
>> +			lcd_dev->dev.parent = dsim->dev;
>> +			dev_set_name(&lcd_dev->dev, "%s", lcd_drv->name);
>> +
>> +			ret = device_register(&lcd_dev->dev);
>> +			if (ret < 0) {
>> +				dev_err(dsim->dev,
>> +					"can't register %s, status %d\n",
>> +					dev_name(&lcd_dev->dev), ret);
>> +				mutex_unlock(&dsim->lock);
>> +
>> +				return NULL;
>> +			}
>> +
>> +			dsim->dsim_lcd_dev = lcd_dev;
>> +			dsim->dsim_lcd_drv = lcd_drv;
>> +
>> +			mutex_unlock(&dsim->lock);
>> +
>> +			return dsim_ddi;
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&dsim->lock);
>> +
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>>
>> ...
>>
>> +static int s5p_mipi_dsi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct resource *res;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_device *dsim;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_config *dsim_config;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_platform_data *dsim_pd;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_ddi *dsim_ddi;
>> +	int ret = -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	dsim = kzalloc(sizeof(struct mipi_dsim_device), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!dsim) {
>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to allocate dsim object.\n");
>> +		return -EFAULT;
> 
> ENOMEM!
> 
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	dsim->pd = to_dsim_plat(pdev);
>> +	dsim->dev = &pdev->dev;
>> +	dsim->id = pdev->id;
>> +
>> +	/* get mipi_dsim_platform_data. */
>> +	dsim_pd = (struct mipi_dsim_platform_data *)dsim->pd;
>> +	if (dsim_pd == NULL) {
>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get platform data for dsim.\n");
>> +		goto err_clock_get;
>> +	}
>>
>> ...
>>
>> +irqreturn_t s5p_mipi_dsi_interrupt_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int intsrc = 0;
>> +	unsigned int intmsk = 0;
>> +	struct mipi_dsim_device *dsim = NULL;
>> +
>> +	dsim = (struct mipi_dsim_device *)dev_id;
> 
> unneeded and undesirable cast of void*
> 


Yes, I will fix it.

>> +	if (!dsim) {
>> +		dev_dbg(dsim->dev, KERN_ERR "%s:error: wrong parameter\n",
>> +							__func__);
>> +		return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	intsrc = s5p_mipi_dsi_read_interrupt(dsim);
>> +	intmsk = s5p_mipi_dsi_read_interrupt_mask(dsim);
>> +
>> +	intmsk = ~(intmsk) & intsrc;
>> +
>> +	switch (intmsk) {
>> +	case INTMSK_RX_DONE:
>> +		complete(&dsim_rd_comp);
>> +		dev_dbg(dsim->dev, "MIPI INTMSK_RX_DONE\n");
>> +		break;
>> +	case INTMSK_FIFO_EMPTY:
>> +		complete(&dsim_wr_comp);
>> +		dev_dbg(dsim->dev, "MIPI INTMSK_FIFO_EMPTY\n");
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	s5p_mipi_dsi_clear_interrupt(dsim, intmsk);
>> +
>> +	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> +}
>>
>> ...
>>
> 
> Generally: the use of the Efoo errno codes is chaotic.  Please check it
> all over.
> 
>