Thread (60 messages) 60 messages, 14 authors, 2013-02-02

Re: [RFC v2 0/5] Common Display Framework

From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
Date: 2012-11-26 07:53:54
Also in: dri-devel, linux-media

Hi Thierry,

Am Freitag, den 23.11.2012, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Thierry Reding:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:45:31PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
[...]
quoted
Display entities are accessed by driver using notifiers. Any driver can
register a display entity notifier with the CDF, which then calls the notifier
when a matching display entity is registered. The reason for this asynchronous
mode of operation, compared to how drivers acquire regulator or clock
resources, is that the display entities can use resources provided by the
display driver. For instance a panel can be a child of the DBI or DSI bus
controlled by the display device, or use a clock provided by that device. We
can't defer the display device probe until the panel is registered and also
defer the panel device probe until the display is registered. As most display
drivers need to handle output devices hotplug (HDMI monitors for instance),
handling other display entities through a notification system seemed to be the
easiest solution.

Note that this brings a different issue after registration, as display
controller and display entity drivers would take a reference to each other.
Those circular references would make driver unloading impossible. One possible
solution to this problem would be to simulate an unplug event for the display
entity, to force the display driver to release the dislay entities it uses. We
would need a userspace API for that though. Better solutions would of course
be welcome.
Maybe I don't understand all of the underlying issues correctly, but a
parent/child model would seem like a better solution to me. We discussed
this back when designing the DT bindings for Tegra DRM and came to the
conclusion that the output resource of the display controller (RGB,
HDMI, DSI or TVO) was the most suitable candidate to be the parent of
the panel or display attached to it. The reason for that decision was
that it keeps the flow of data or addressing of nodes consistent. So the
chain would look something like this (on Tegra):

	CPU
	+-host1x
	  +-dc
	    +-rgb
	    | +-panel
	    +-hdmi
	      +-monitor

In a natural way this makes the output resource the master of the panel
or display. From a programming point of view this becomes quite easy to
implement and is very similar to how other busses like I2C or SPI are
modelled. In device tree these would be represented as subnodes, while
with platform data some kind of lookup could be done like for regulators
or alternatively a board setup registration mechanism like what's in
place for I2C or SPI.
I second Tomi's answer. Also, describing data bus connections implicitly
with parent/child relationships doesn't work for entities with multiple
inputs. Imagine there are multiple dc's in the above diagram, and the
single hdmi encoder can be connected to either of them via multiplexing.

regards
Philipp
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help