On 01/23/2015 09:01 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:27:46PM +0530, Shobhit Kumar wrote:
On 01/16/2015 05:57 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
@@ -881,13 +889,23 @@ void intel_dsi_init(struct drm_device *dev)
drm_connector_register(connector);
- fixed_mode = dsi->dev_ops->get_modes(&intel_dsi->dev);
+ drm_panel_attach(intel_dsi->panel, connector);
+ drm_panel_get_modes(intel_dsi->panel);
Should be inside the config mutex_lock below.
Why?
Because usually the drm_mode_probed_add gets called in the drm flow with
correct locking, but in this case calling get_modes here results in
drm_mode_probed_add being called which expects the lock to be taken.
Else we will see a big WARN dump. I agree with your comment below but
this was mainly to avoid the warning dump.
+
+ mutex_lock(&dev->mode_config.mutex);
+ list_for_each_entry(scan, &connector->probed_modes, head) {
+ if ((scan->type & DRM_MODE_TYPE_PREFERRED)) {
+ fixed_mode = drm_mode_duplicate(dev, scan);
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ mutex_unlock(&dev->mode_config.mutex);
Generally this is single-threaded init code, no one else can touch it.
Which means you also never ever need locks. We tend to occasionally
sprinkle them around to satisfy general locking checks which are correct
at runtime. But at least in tricky cases that means we also stick a
comment next to them (see e.g. the various places in i915_irq.c).
Merged up to the previous patch, thanks a lot.
-Daniel
Regards
Shobhit
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
