search for: drm_dp_payload_send_msg

...24 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > index ae9d019af9f2..93f08bfd2ab3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > @@ -1989,10 +1989,6 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, > u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; > int i; > > - port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); > - if (!port) > - return -EINVAL; > - > port_num = port->port_num; > mstb = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_mstb_valida...

...thus might end up causing our search to fail on an mstb whose topology refcount has reached 0, but has not yet been removed from it's parent. Ideally, we should further fix this problem by ensuring that we deal with the potential for racing with a hotplug event, which would look like this: * drm_dp_payload_send_msg() retrieves the last living relative of mstb with drm_dp_get_last_connected_port_and_mstb() * drm_dp_payload_send_msg() starts building payload message At the same time, mstb gets unplugged from the topology and is no longer the actual last living relative of the original mstb * drm_dp_payloa...

...thus might end up causing our search to fail on an mstb whose topology refcount has reached 0, but has not yet been removed from it's parent. Ideally, we should further fix this problem by ensuring that we deal with the potential for racing with a hotplug event, which would look like this: * drm_dp_payload_send_msg() retrieves the last living relative of mstb with drm_dp_get_last_connected_port_and_mstb() * drm_dp_payload_send_msg() starts building payload message At the same time, mstb gets unplugged from the topology and is no longer the actual last living relative of the original mstb * drm_dp_payloa...

...le changed, 30 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c index ae9d019af9f2..93f08bfd2ab3 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c @@ -1989,10 +1989,6 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; int i; - port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); - if (!port) - return -EINVAL; - port_num = port->port_num; mstb = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_mstb_validated(mgr, port->parent); if (!mstb) { @@...

...le changed, 30 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c index ef8637f37564..11dd3ede7b7d 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c @@ -2100,10 +2100,6 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; int i; - port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); - if (!port) - return -EINVAL; - port_num = port->port_num; mstb = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_mstb_validated(mgr, port->parent); if (!mstb) { @@...

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

...,7 +1393,7 @@ static void drm_dp_mst_link_probe_work(struct work_struct *work) mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); if (mstb) { drm_dp_check_and_send_link_address(mgr, mstb); - drm_dp_put_mst_branch_device(mstb); + drm_dp_mst_topology_put_mstb(mstb); } } @@ -1726,17 +1735,17 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; int i; - port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); if (!port) return -EINVAL; port_num = port->port_num; - mstb = drm_dp_get_validated_mstb_ref...

...eanup that can be done, but I think this is a good place to start off for now :). Also available on gitlab: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/lyudess/linux/commits/wip/mst-dual-kref-start-v6 Lyude Paul (20): drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_add_port() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_payload_send_msg() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_allocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_deallocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Rename drm_dp_mst_get_validated_(port|mstb)_ref and friends drm/dp_mst: Introduce new refcounting scheme for mstbs and ports drm/dp_mst: Restart...

...;s still more cleanup that can be done, but I think this is a good place to start off for now :). Not available on gitlab, as this is the final version of the series before I push! hooray~ Lyude Paul (20): drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_add_port() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_payload_send_msg() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_allocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_deallocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Rename drm_dp_mst_get_validated_(port|mstb)_ref and friends drm/dp_mst: Introduce new refcounting scheme for mstbs and ports drm/dp_mst: Restart...

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

...d.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> Cc: David Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> Cc: Jerry Zuo <Jerry.Zuo at amd.com> Cc: Juston Li <juston.li at intel.com> Lyude Paul (20): drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_add_port() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_payload_send_msg() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_allocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Fix some formatting in drm_dp_mst_deallocate_vcpi() drm/dp_mst: Rename drm_dp_mst_get_validated_(port|mstb)_ref and friends drm/dp_mst: Introduce new refcounting scheme for mstbs and ports drm/dp_mst: Restart...

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

This is a WIP version of the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream

...nt; - kref_get(&rmstb->kref); *port_num = found_port->port_num; + } else { + /* Search again, starting from this parent */ + mstb = found_port->parent; } - } + } while (!rmstb); +out: mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); return rmstb; } @@ -1726,17 +1991,19 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; int i; - port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); if (!port) return -EINVAL; port_num = port->port_num; - mstb = drm_dp_get_validated_mstb_ref...

...while (!rmstb); Hm, is this a bugfix of validating the entire chain? Afaiui the new topology_get still validates the entire chain, so I'm a bit confused what this does here. > +out: > mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); > return rmstb; > } > @@ -1726,17 +1991,19 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, > u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; > int i; > > - port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); > + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); > if (!port) > return -EINVAL; > > port_num = port->por...

...9;ve raced and give up? Not sure why we need to send out the message still if the recipient is gone ... -Daniel > > > > > > +out: > > > mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); > > > return rmstb; > > > } > > > @@ -1726,17 +1991,19 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct > > > drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, > > > u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; > > > int i; > > > > > > - port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); > > > + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); > > >...

...s actually still part of a topology. Maybe that also means we should come up with a different name for topology_refcount, resource_refcount maybe? > > > +out: > > mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); > > return rmstb; > > } > > @@ -1726,17 +1991,19 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct > > drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, > > u8 sinks[DRM_DP_MAX_SDP_STREAMS]; > > int i; > > > > - port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); > > + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, port); > > if (!port) > > return -...

...tb = found_port->parent; - kref_get(&rmstb->kref); - *port_num = found_port->port_num; + if (drm_dp_mst_topology_try_get_mstb(rmstb)) + *port_num = found_port->port_num; + else + rmstb = NULL; } } mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); @@ -1742,7 +2085,9 @@ static int drm_dp_payload_send_msg(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, port_num = port->port_num; mstb = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_mstb_validated(mgr, port->parent); if (!mstb) { - mstb = drm_dp_get_last_connected_port_and_mstb(mgr, port->parent, &port_num); + mstb = drm_dp_get_last_connected_port_and_mstb(mgr, +...