Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] drm: bridge: Add thc63lvd1024 LVDS decoder driver

[Andrzej Hajda]

On 27.03.2018 08:24, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> On 03/16/2018 05:16 PM, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
>> Add DRM bridge driver for Thine THC63LVD1024 LVDS to digital parallel
>> output converter.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Niklas SÃderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig        |   6 +
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile       |   1 +
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c | 255 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  3 files changed, 262 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig
>> index 3b99d5a..5815a20 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig
>> @@ -92,6 +92,12 @@ config DRM_SII9234
>>  	  It is an I2C driver, that detects connection of MHL bridge
>>  	  and starts encapsulation of HDMI signal.
>>  
>> +config DRM_THINE_THC63LVD1024
>> +	tristate "Thine THC63LVD1024 LVDS decoder bridge"
>> +	depends on OF
>> +	---help---
>> +	  Thine THC63LVD1024 LVDS/parallel converter driver.
>> +
>>  config DRM_TOSHIBA_TC358767
>>  	tristate "Toshiba TC358767 eDP bridge"
>>  	depends on OF
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile
>> index 373eb28..fd90b16 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile
>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_PARADE_PS8622) += parade-ps8622.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_SIL_SII8620) += sil-sii8620.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_SII902X) += sii902x.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_SII9234) += sii9234.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_THINE_THC63LVD1024) += thc63lvd1024.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_TOSHIBA_TC358767) += tc358767.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_ANALOGIX_DP) += analogix/
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DRM_I2C_ADV7511) += adv7511/
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..02a54c2
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/*
>> + * THC63LVD1024 LVDS to parallel data DRM bridge driver.
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2018 Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <drm/drmP.h>
>> +#include <drm/drm_bridge.h>
>> +#include <drm/drm_panel.h>
>> +
>> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>> +#include <linux/of_graph.h>
>> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>> +
>> +enum {
>> +	THC63_LVDS_IN0,
>> +	THC63_LVDS_IN1,
>> +	THC63_DIGITAL_OUT0,
>> +	THC63_DIGITAL_OUT1,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const char * const thc63_reg_names[] = {
>> +	"vcc", "lvcc", "pvcc", "cvcc",
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct thc63_dev {
>> +	struct device *dev;
>> +
>> +	struct regulator *vccs[ARRAY_SIZE(thc63_reg_names)];
>> +
>> +	struct gpio_desc *pdwn;
>> +	struct gpio_desc *oe;
>> +
>> +	struct drm_bridge bridge;
>> +	struct drm_bridge *next;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static inline struct thc63_dev *to_thc63(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +{
>> +	return container_of(bridge, struct thc63_dev, bridge);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int thc63_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +{
>> +	struct thc63_dev *thc63 = to_thc63(bridge);
>> +
>> +	return drm_bridge_attach(bridge->encoder, thc63->next, bridge);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void thc63_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +{
>> +	struct thc63_dev *thc63 = to_thc63(bridge);
>> +	struct regulator *vcc;
>> +	int i;
> unsigned int i;

Why? You are introducing silly bug this way, see few lines below.

>
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(thc63->vccs); i++) {
>> +		vcc = thc63->vccs[i];
>> +		if (!vcc)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		if (regulator_enable(vcc))
>> +			goto error_vcc_enable;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (thc63->pdwn)
>> +		gpiod_set_value(thc63->pdwn, 0);
>> +
>> +	if (thc63->oe)
>> +		gpiod_set_value(thc63->oe, 1);
>> +
>> +	return;
>> +
>> +error_vcc_enable:
>> +	dev_err(thc63->dev, "Failed to enable regulator %s\n",
>> +		thc63_reg_names[i]);
>> +
>> +	for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) {

Here, the loop will not end if you define i unsigned.

I know one can change the loop, to make it working with unsigned. But
this clearly shows that using unsigned is more risky.
What are advantages of unsigned vs int in this case. Are there some
guidelines/discussions about it?

Regards
Andrzej

>> +		vcc = thc63->vccs[i];
>> +		if (!vcc)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		regulator_disable(vcc);
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void thc63_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>> +{
>> +	struct thc63_dev *thc63 = to_thc63(bridge);
>> +	struct regulator *vcc;
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	if (thc63->oe)
>> +		gpiod_set_value(thc63->oe, 0);
>> +
>> +	if (thc63->pdwn)
>> +		gpiod_set_value(thc63->pdwn, 1);
>> +
>> +	for (i = ARRAY_SIZE(thc63->vccs) - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
>> +		vcc = thc63->vccs[i];
>> +		if (!vcc)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		if (regulator_disable(vcc))
>> +			dev_dbg(thc63->dev,
>> +				"Failed to disable regulator %s\n",
>> +				thc63_reg_names[i]);
>> +	}
>> +}
>> +
>> +struct drm_bridge_funcs thc63_bridge_func = {
> Apparently you missed all my comments from v2 review.
>
> If you like to avoid non-NULL function pointers to the void, please 
> use static const storage qualifier.
>
> --
> With best wishes,
> Vladimir
>
>
>