Re: [PATCH] drm/msm: Initialize MDSS irq domain at probe time

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On 26/11/2021 12:26, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 26/11/21 01:06, Dmitry Baryshkov ha scritto:
> > On 25/11/2021 18:09, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > Since commit 8f59ee9a570c ("drm/msm/dsi: Adjust probe order"), the
> > > DSI host gets initialized earlier, but this caused unability to probe
> > > the entire stack of components because they all depend on interrupts
> > > coming from the main `mdss` node (mdp5, or dpu1).
> > >
> > > To fix this issue, also anticipate probing mdp5 or dpu1 by initializing
> > > them at msm_pdev_probe() time: this will make sure that we add the
> > > required interrupt controller mapping before dsi and/or other components
> > > try to initialize, finally satisfying the dependency.
> > >
> > > While at it, also change the allocation of msm_drm_private to use the
> > > devm variant of kzalloc().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 8f59ee9a570c ("drm/msm/dsi: Adjust probe order")
> > > Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
> > > <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Another issue (or a pack of issues):
> > Now the msm_drm_init() is unbalanced with msm_drm_uninit(). Bits of 
> > code (putting the drm dev, removing the IRQ domain, etc) have to be 
> > called now from the msm_pdev_remove() function rather than from the 
> > unbind path.
> >
> > The following changes fix the observed issues here, however additional 
> > care should be taken.
>
>
> Hello Dmitry,
>
> thanks for the thorough review (and solutions!).
> Are you going to push your changes on top, or should I send a V2?

Please send a v2. As you see, my suggestions have to be validated too 
(and they were based on crashes/issues observed locally).


--
With best wishes
Dmitry