Le 27/08/24 - 16:39, Maxime Ripard a écrit :
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 03:24:10PM GMT, Louis Chauvet wrote:
> > Le 27/08/24 - 15:15, Maxime Ripard a écrit :
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:57:36AM GMT, Louis Chauvet wrote:
> > > > The current VKMS driver uses non-managed function to create connectors. 
> > > > It
> > > > is not an issue yet, but in order to support multiple devices easily,
> > > > convert this code to use drm and device managed helpers.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Louis Chauvet <louis.chau...@bootlin.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_drv.h    |  1 -
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_output.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
> > > >  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_drv.h 
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_drv.h
> > > > index 5e46ea5b96dc..9a3c6c34d1f6 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_drv.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_drv.h
> > > > @@ -99,7 +99,6 @@ struct vkms_crtc_state {
> > > >  struct vkms_output {
> > > >         struct drm_crtc crtc;
> > > >         struct drm_encoder encoder;
> > > > -       struct drm_connector connector;
> > > >         struct drm_writeback_connector wb_connector;
> > > >         struct hrtimer vblank_hrtimer;
> > > >         ktime_t period_ns;
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_output.c 
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_output.c
> > > > index 5ce70dd946aa..4fe6b88e8081 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_output.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_output.c
> > > > @@ -3,11 +3,11 @@
> > > >  #include "vkms_drv.h"
> > > >  #include <drm/drm_atomic_helper.h>
> > > >  #include <drm/drm_edid.h>
> > > > +#include <drm/drm_managed.h>
> > > >  #include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
> > > >  
> > > >  static const struct drm_connector_funcs vkms_connector_funcs = {
> > > >         .fill_modes = drm_helper_probe_single_connector_modes,
> > > > -       .destroy = drm_connector_cleanup,
> > > >         .reset = drm_atomic_helper_connector_reset,
> > > >         .atomic_duplicate_state = 
> > > > drm_atomic_helper_connector_duplicate_state,
> > > >         .atomic_destroy_state = 
> > > > drm_atomic_helper_connector_destroy_state,
> > > > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ int vkms_output_init(struct vkms_device *vkmsdev, int 
> > > > index)
> > > >  {
> > > >         struct vkms_output *output = &vkmsdev->output;
> > > >         struct drm_device *dev = &vkmsdev->drm;
> > > > -       struct drm_connector *connector = &output->connector;
> > > > +       struct drm_connector *connector;
> > > >         struct drm_encoder *encoder = &output->encoder;
> > > >         struct drm_crtc *crtc = &output->crtc;
> > > >         struct vkms_plane *primary, *cursor = NULL;
> > > > @@ -80,8 +80,15 @@ int vkms_output_init(struct vkms_device *vkmsdev, 
> > > > int index)
> > > >         if (ret)
> > > >                 return ret;
> > > >  
> > > > -       ret = drm_connector_init(dev, connector, &vkms_connector_funcs,
> > > > -                                DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_VIRTUAL);
> > > > +       connector = drmm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*connector), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > +       if (!connector) {
> > > > +               DRM_ERROR("Failed to allocate connector\n");
> > > > +               ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > > +               goto err_connector;
> > > > +       }
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > I think it would be worth explaining why you need to move to a separate
> > > allocation for the connector now.
> > > 
> > > Maxime
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This is in preparation for ConfigFS implementation, as the number of 
> > connector/encoders/crtc/planes... will be dynamic, we need to have 
> > separate alloaction.
> > 
> > If I add this paragraph in the commit message, is it sufficient?
> > 
> >     A specific allocation for the connector is not strictly necessary 
> >     at this point, but in order to implement dynamic configuration of 
> >     VKMS (configFS), it will be easier to have one allocation per 
> >     connector.
> > 
> > (same for encoder & CRTC)
> 
> Yeah, that's a good message, but it probably belongs in a separate patch
> then.

Can you explain what you mean by "in a separate patch"? I wanted to write 
this paragraph in the commit log.

Louis Chauvet

Reply via email to