[v7,29/36] drm/vc4: tests: Remove vc4_dummy_plane structure

  The vc4_dummy_plane structure is an exact equivalent to vc4_plane, so we
don't need it.

Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c       |  6 ++----
 drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h       |  9 ++-------
 drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c | 14 +++++---------
 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
  

On 2/22/24 15:14, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> The vc4_dummy_plane structure is an exact equivalent to vc4_plane, so we

Maybe I understood incorrectly, but isn't the vc4_dummy_plane structure 
equivalent to drm_plane?

Best Regards,
- Maíra

> don't need it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c       |  6 ++----
>   drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h       |  9 ++-------
>   drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c | 14 +++++---------
>   3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c
> index becb3dbaa548..0731a7d85d7a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.c
> @@ -109,16 +109,14 @@ static const struct vc4_mock_desc vc5_mock =
>   static int __build_one_pipe(struct kunit *test, struct drm_device *drm,
>   			    const struct vc4_mock_pipe_desc *pipe)
>   {
> -	struct vc4_dummy_plane *dummy_plane;
>   	struct drm_plane *plane;
>   	struct vc4_dummy_crtc *dummy_crtc;
>   	struct drm_crtc *crtc;
>   	unsigned int i;
>   
> -	dummy_plane = vc4_dummy_plane(test, drm, DRM_PLANE_TYPE_PRIMARY);
> -	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, dummy_plane);
> +	plane = vc4_dummy_plane(test, drm, DRM_PLANE_TYPE_PRIMARY);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, plane);
>   
> -	plane = &dummy_plane->plane.base;
>   	dummy_crtc = vc4_mock_pv(test, drm, plane, pipe->data);
>   	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, dummy_crtc);
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h
> index 2d0b339bd9f3..002b6218960c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock.h
> @@ -21,13 +21,8 @@ struct drm_crtc *vc4_find_crtc_for_encoder(struct kunit *test,
>   	return NULL;
>   }
>   
> -struct vc4_dummy_plane {
> -	struct vc4_plane plane;
> -};
> -
> -struct vc4_dummy_plane *vc4_dummy_plane(struct kunit *test,
> -					struct drm_device *drm,
> -					enum drm_plane_type type);
> +struct drm_plane *vc4_dummy_plane(struct kunit *test, struct drm_device *drm,
> +				  enum drm_plane_type type);
>   
>   struct vc4_dummy_crtc {
>   	struct vc4_crtc crtc;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c
> index 62b18f5f41db..973f5f929097 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/tests/vc4_mock_plane.c
> @@ -22,15 +22,12 @@ static const uint32_t vc4_dummy_plane_formats[] = {
>   	DRM_FORMAT_XRGB8888,
>   };
>   
> -struct vc4_dummy_plane *vc4_dummy_plane(struct kunit *test,
> -					struct drm_device *drm,
> -					enum drm_plane_type type)
> +struct drm_plane *vc4_dummy_plane(struct kunit *test, struct drm_device *drm,
> +				  enum drm_plane_type type)
>   {
> -	struct vc4_dummy_plane *dummy_plane;
>   	struct drm_plane *plane;
>   
> -	dummy_plane = drmm_universal_plane_alloc(drm,
> -						 struct vc4_dummy_plane, plane.base,
> +	plane = __drmm_universal_plane_alloc(drm, sizeof(struct drm_plane), 0,
>   						 0,
>   						 &vc4_dummy_plane_funcs,
>   						 vc4_dummy_plane_formats,
> @@ -38,10 +35,9 @@ struct vc4_dummy_plane *vc4_dummy_plane(struct kunit *test,
>   						 NULL,
>   						 DRM_PLANE_TYPE_PRIMARY,
>   						 NULL);
> -	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, dummy_plane);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, plane);
>   
> -	plane = &dummy_plane->plane.base;
>   	drm_plane_helper_add(plane, &vc4_dummy_plane_helper_funcs);
>   
> -	return dummy_plane;
> +	return plane;
>   }
>
  

Hi Maíra,

Thanks for you reviews!

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 09:29:32AM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
> On 2/22/24 15:14, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > The vc4_dummy_plane structure is an exact equivalent to vc4_plane, so we
> 
> Maybe I understood incorrectly, but isn't the vc4_dummy_plane structure
> equivalent to drm_plane?

Both statements are true :)

vc4 itself uses vc4_plane to holds its plane-related content, but it
turns out that there's nothing in that structure anymore and vc4_plane
== drm_plane.

In our mock driver, we have another structure meant to store the
mock-plane-related content which doesn't have anything in it anymore,
and is thus equivalent to vc4_plane.

So, basically, vc4_dummy_plane == vc4_plane == drm_plane.

This patch is only about getting rid of vc4_dummy_plane though.

Is it clearer?

Maxime
  

Hi Maxime,

On 2/27/24 10:02, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Maíra,
> 
> Thanks for you reviews!
> 
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 09:29:32AM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
>> On 2/22/24 15:14, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>> The vc4_dummy_plane structure is an exact equivalent to vc4_plane, so we
>>
>> Maybe I understood incorrectly, but isn't the vc4_dummy_plane structure
>> equivalent to drm_plane?
> 
> Both statements are true :)
> 
> vc4 itself uses vc4_plane to holds its plane-related content, but it
> turns out that there's nothing in that structure anymore and vc4_plane
> == drm_plane.
> 
> In our mock driver, we have another structure meant to store the
> mock-plane-related content which doesn't have anything in it anymore,
> and is thus equivalent to vc4_plane.
> 
> So, basically, vc4_dummy_plane == vc4_plane == drm_plane.
> 
> This patch is only about getting rid of vc4_dummy_plane though.
> 
> Is it clearer?
> 

Yeah, with that pointed out, you can add my:

Reviewed-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal@igalia.com>

Best Regards,
- Maíra

> Maxime
  

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 07:45:01PM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
> Hi Maxime,
> 
> On 2/27/24 10:02, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Hi Maíra,
> > 
> > Thanks for you reviews!
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 09:29:32AM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
> > > On 2/22/24 15:14, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > > The vc4_dummy_plane structure is an exact equivalent to vc4_plane, so we
> > > 
> > > Maybe I understood incorrectly, but isn't the vc4_dummy_plane structure
> > > equivalent to drm_plane?
> > 
> > Both statements are true :)
> > 
> > vc4 itself uses vc4_plane to holds its plane-related content, but it
> > turns out that there's nothing in that structure anymore and vc4_plane
> > == drm_plane.
> > 
> > In our mock driver, we have another structure meant to store the
> > mock-plane-related content which doesn't have anything in it anymore,
> > and is thus equivalent to vc4_plane.
> > 
> > So, basically, vc4_dummy_plane == vc4_plane == drm_plane.
> > 
> > This patch is only about getting rid of vc4_dummy_plane though.
> > 
> > Is it clearer?
> > 
> 
> Yeah, with that pointed out, you can add my:

I'll rephrase for the next version then

> Reviewed-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal@igalia.com>

Thanks!
Maxime
  

Hi Maxime,

Thanks for the review.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 7:30 AM
> To: Klymenko, Anatoliy <Anatoliy.Klymenko@amd.com>
> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>; Maarten Lankhorst
> <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>; Thomas Zimmermann
> <tzimmermann@suse.de>; David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>; Daniel Vetter
> <daniel@ffwll.ch>; Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>; Andrzej Hajda
> <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>; Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>; Robert
> Foss <rfoss@kernel.org>; Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>; Jernej Skrabec
> <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-arm-
> kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drm/atomic-helper: Add select_output_bus_format
> callback
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 08:44:45PM -0800, Anatoliy Klymenko wrote:
> > Add select_output_bus_format to CRTC atomic helpers callbacks. This
> > callback Will allow CRTC to participate in media bus format
> > negotiation over connected DRM bridge chain and impose CRTC-specific
> restrictions.
> > A good example is CRTC implemented as FPGA soft IP. This kind of CRTC
> > will most certainly support a single output media bus format, as
> > supporting multiple runtime options consumes extra FPGA resources. A
> > variety of options for FPGA are usually achieved by synthesizing IP
> > with different parameters.
> >
> > Incorporate select_output_bus_format callback into the format
> > negotiation stage to fix the input bus format of the first DRM bridge in the
> chain.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anatoliy Klymenko <anatoliy.klymenko@amd.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c             | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
> >  include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h | 31
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c index 521a71c61b16..453ae3d174b4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> >  #include <drm/drm_edid.h>
> >  #include <drm/drm_encoder.h>
> >  #include <drm/drm_file.h>
> > +#include <drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h>
> >  #include <drm/drm_of.h>
> >  #include <drm/drm_print.h>
> >
> > @@ -879,7 +880,8 @@ static int select_bus_fmt_recursive(struct drm_bridge
> *first_bridge,
> >  	unsigned int i, num_in_bus_fmts = 0;
> >  	struct drm_bridge_state *cur_state;
> >  	struct drm_bridge *prev_bridge;
> > -	u32 *in_bus_fmts;
> > +	struct drm_crtc *crtc = crtc_state->crtc;
> > +	u32 *in_bus_fmts, in_fmt;
> >  	int ret;
> >
> >  	prev_bridge = drm_bridge_get_prev_bridge(cur_bridge);
> > @@ -933,7 +935,20 @@ static int select_bus_fmt_recursive(struct drm_bridge
> *first_bridge,
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >  	if (first_bridge == cur_bridge) {
> > -		cur_state->input_bus_cfg.format = in_bus_fmts[0];
> > +		in_fmt = in_bus_fmts[0];
> > +		if (crtc->helper_private &&
> > +		    crtc->helper_private->select_output_bus_format) {
> > +			in_fmt = crtc->helper_private-
> >select_output_bus_format(
> > +							crtc,
> > +							crtc->state,
> > +							in_bus_fmts,
> > +							num_in_bus_fmts);
> > +			if (!in_fmt) {
> > +				kfree(in_bus_fmts);
> > +				return -ENOTSUPP;
> > +			}
> > +		}
> > +		cur_state->input_bus_cfg.format = in_fmt;
> 
> I don't think we should start poking at the CRTC internals, but we should rather
> provide a helper here.

Makes sense, thank you. ACK.

> 
> >  		cur_state->output_bus_cfg.format = out_bus_fmt;
> >  		kfree(in_bus_fmts);
> >  		return 0;
> > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > b/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > index 881b03e4dc28..7c21ae1fe3ad 100644
> > --- a/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > +++ b/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > @@ -489,6 +489,37 @@ struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs {
> >  				     bool in_vblank_irq, int *vpos, int *hpos,
> >  				     ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime,
> >  				     const struct drm_display_mode *mode);
> > +
> > +	/**
> > +	 * @select_output_bus_format
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Called by the first connected DRM bridge to negotiate input media
> > +	 * bus format. CRTC is expected to pick preferable media formats from
> > +	 * the list supported by the DRM bridge chain.
> 
> There's nothing restricting it to bridges here. Please rephrase this to remove the
> bridge mention. The user is typically going to be the encoder, and bridges are just
> an automagic implementation of an encoder.
> 

OK. I'll fix than in the next version.

> And generally speaking, I'd really like to have an implementation available before
> merging this.
>

Well, 2 instances of this callback implementations exist as drafts, as this is the new API. A little bit of a chicken and egg problem. I'll try to groom at least one of them into upstreamable shape and attach it to the patch set.

> Maxime

-Anatoliy
  

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 10:00:19PM +0000, Klymenko, Anatoliy wrote:
> > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > > b/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > > index 881b03e4dc28..7c21ae1fe3ad 100644
> > > --- a/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_modeset_helper_vtables.h
> > > @@ -489,6 +489,37 @@ struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs {
> > >  				     bool in_vblank_irq, int *vpos, int *hpos,
> > >  				     ktime_t *stime, ktime_t *etime,
> > >  				     const struct drm_display_mode *mode);
> > > +
> > > +	/**
> > > +	 * @select_output_bus_format
> > > +	 *
> > > +	 * Called by the first connected DRM bridge to negotiate input media
> > > +	 * bus format. CRTC is expected to pick preferable media formats from
> > > +	 * the list supported by the DRM bridge chain.
> > 
> > There's nothing restricting it to bridges here. Please rephrase this to remove the
> > bridge mention. The user is typically going to be the encoder, and bridges are just
> > an automagic implementation of an encoder.
> > 
> 
> OK. I'll fix than in the next version.
> 
> > And generally speaking, I'd really like to have an implementation available before
> > merging this.
> >
> 
> Well, 2 instances of this callback implementations exist as drafts, as
> this is the new API. A little bit of a chicken and egg problem. I'll
> try to groom at least one of them into upstreamable shape and attach
> it to the patch set.

That's totally what I meant :)

I basically don't want to have an interface that isn't used. If you
provide an implementation in the same series, it's totally reasonable

Maxime