Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] drm/ingenic: Attach bridge chain to encoders

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi Paul,


> Am 23.09.2021 um 21:39 schrieb Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> 
> 
> Le jeu., sept. 23 2021 at 20:52:23 +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>> Hi Paul,
>>> Am 23.09.2021 um 15:30 schrieb Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> Hi Nikolaus,
>>> Le jeu., sept. 23 2021 at 13:41:28 +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>>>> Hi Laurent,
>>>> Ah, ok.
>>>> But then we still have issues.
>>>> Firstly I would assume that get_edid only works properly if it is initialized
>>>> through dw_hdmi_connector_create().
>>>> Next, in the current code, passing DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR to
>>>> dw_hdmi_bridge_attach() indeed does not call dw_hdmi_connector_create()
>>>> but returns 0.
>>>> This patch 6/6 makes drm/ingenic unconditionally require a connector
>>>> to be attached which is defined somewhere else (device tree e.g. "connector-hdmi")
>>>> unrelated to dw-hdmi. Current upstream code for drm/ingenic does not init/attach
>>>> such a connector on its own so it did work before.
>>>> I.e. I think we can't just use parts of dw-hdmi.
>>> The fact that Laurent is using dw-hdmi with DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR on Renesas makes me think that it's possible here as well. There's no reason why it shouldn't work with ingenic-drm.
>> That is interesting and Laurent can probably comment on differences between
>> his setup (I wasn't able to deduce what device you are referring to) and dw-hdmi.
>> For jz4780 we tried that first. I do not remember the exact reasons but we wasted
>> weeks trying to but failed to get it working. While the dw-hdmi connector simply works
>> on top of upstream and fails only if we apply your patch.
>> Another issue is how you want to tell connector-hdmi to use the extra i2c bus driver
>> for ddc which is not available directly as a standard i2c controller of the jz4780.
>> hdmi-connector.yaml defines:
>>  ddc-i2c-bus:
>> 	description: phandle link to the I2C controller used for DDC EDID probing
>> 	$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
>> So we would need some ddc-i2c-bus = <&i2c-controller-inside-the dw-hdmi>.
>> But that i2c-controller-inside-the dw-hdmi does not exist in device tree
>> and can not be added unless someone significantly rewrites dw-hdmi to
>> register and expose it as i2c controller.
> 
> No, you don't need to do that at all. Just don't set the "ddc-i2c-bus" property.

And then ddc from dw-hdmi works?

> 
>>> The ingenic-drm driver does not need to create any connector. The "connector-hdmi" is connected to dw-hdmi as the "next bridge" in the list.
>> Sure. It does not *create* a connector. It expects that it can safely call
>> drm_bridge_connector_init() to get a pointer to a newly created connector.
>> But if we use the dw-hdmi connector, there is no such connector and "next bridge".
> 
> We don't want to use the dw-hdmi connector. Your "next bridge" is the "hdmi-connector" that should be wired in DTS.
> 
>> Or can you tell me how to make the dw-hdmi connector created by
>> dw_hdmi_connector_create() become the "next bridge" in the list for your driver?
>> But without significantly rewriting dw-hdmi.c (and testing).
> 
> Wire it to the LCD node in DTS...
> 
> See how we do it for the IT66121 driver:
> https://github.com/OpenDingux/linux/blob/jz-5.15/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/rg350m.dts#L114-L134

That is how we already tried.

> 
>>>> If drm_bridge_attach() would return some errno if DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR
>>>> is set, initialization in ingenic_drm_bind() would fail likewise with "Unable to attach bridge".
>>>> So in any case dw-hdmi is broken by this drm/ingenic patch unless someone
>>>> reworks it to make it compatible.
>>> Where would the errno be returned? Why would drm_bridge_attach() return an error code?
>> Currently dw_hdmi_bridge_attach() returns 0 if it is asked to support
>> DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR.
>> This is not treated as an error by drm_bridge_attach().
>> Here it could return an error (-ENOTSUPP?) instead, to allow for error handling
>> by its caller.
> 
> And why would you do that? If you don't want to attach a connector, then drm_bridge_attach() doesn't need to do much. So it's normal that it returns zero.
> 
>> But that raises an error message like "failed to attach bridge to encoder" and
>> the bridge is reset and detached.
>>>> Another issue is that dw_hdmi_connector_create() does not only do dcd/edid
>>>> but appears to detects hot plug and does some special initialization.
>>>> So we probably loose hotplug detect if we just use drm_bridge_funcs.get_edid().
>>> There's drm_bridge_funcs.detect().
>> You mean in dw-hdmi? Yes, it calls dw_hdmi_bridge_detect() which calls dw_hdmi_detect().
>> This does some read_hpd.
>> Anyways, this does not solve the problem that with your drm/ingenic proposal the
>> dw-hdmi subsystem (hdmi + ddc) can no longer be initialized properly unless someone
>> fixes either.
>> So IMHO this should be treated as a significant blocking point for your patch
>> because it breaks something that is working upstream and there seems to be no
>> rationale to change it.
>> Your commit message just says:
>> "All the bridges are now attached with DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR."
>> but gives no reason why.
>> I fully understand that you want to change it and Laurent said that it will become
>> standard in the far future. Therefore I suggest to find a way that you can find out
>> if a connector has already been created by drm_bridge_attach() to stay compatible
>> with current upstream code.
> 
> No, absolutely not. There is nothing upstream yet that can bind the ingenic-drm driver with the dw-hdmi driver.

We have proposed it a while ago using nothing special.

> This is your downstream patch. I'm not breaking anything that's upstream, so there is no blocking point.
> 
> Besides, even with your downstream patch I don't see any reason why the dw-hdmi driver wouldn't work with this patch, provided it's wired properly, and you never did show a proof of failure either. You come up with "possible points where it will fail" but these are based on your assumptions on how the drivers should be working together, and I think you somehow miss the whole picture.

Yes, maybe.

> 
> Start by wiring things properly, like in my previously linked DTS, and *test*. If it fails, tell us where it fails.

Well, I tell where drm_bridge_attach fails with DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR...

> Because your "it doesn't work" arguments have zero weight otherwise.

I hope I still can find it. So I can't promise anything.
We have had it complete in DTS and added code to parse it.
It may have been wiped out by cleaning up patch series during rebase.

> 
> If I can find some time this weekend I will test it myself.

You may be faster than me.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus