Hi Simon, Thanks for the review.
On 02/12/23 23:53, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Devarsh, > > On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 07:27, Devarsh Thakkar <devar...@ti.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Simon, >> >> Thanks for the review. >> >> On 13/11/23 01:31, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Devarsh, >>> >>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 at 08:29, Devarsh Thakkar <devar...@ti.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Fill video handoff fields in video_post_probe >>>> as at this point we have full framebuffer-related >>>> information. >>>> >>>> Also fill all the fields available in video hand-off >>>> struct as those were missing earlier and U-boot >>> >>> U-Boot >>> >>>> framework expects them to be filled for some of the >>>> functionalities. >>> >>> Can you wrap your commit messages to closer to 72 chars? >>> >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>> Signed-off-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devar...@ti.com> >>>> --- >>>> V2: >>>> - No change >>>> >>>> V3: >>>> - Fix commit message per review comment >>>> - Add a note explaining assumption of single framebuffer >>>> --- >>>> drivers/video/video-uclass.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++---------- >>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/video/video-uclass.c b/drivers/video/video-uclass.c >>>> index f619b5ae56..edc3376b46 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/video/video-uclass.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/video/video-uclass.c >>>> @@ -154,16 +154,6 @@ int video_reserve(ulong *addrp) >>>> debug("Video frame buffers from %lx to %lx\n", gd->video_bottom, >>>> gd->video_top); >>>> >>>> - if (spl_phase() == PHASE_SPL && CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(VIDEO_HANDOFF)) { >>>> - struct video_handoff *ho; >>>> - >>>> - ho = bloblist_add(BLOBLISTT_U_BOOT_VIDEO, sizeof(*ho), 0); >>>> - if (!ho) >>>> - return log_msg_ret("blf", -ENOENT); >>>> - ho->fb = *addrp; >>>> - ho->size = size; >>>> - } >>>> - >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> >>>> @@ -559,6 +549,25 @@ static int video_post_probe(struct udevice *dev) >>>> >>>> priv->fb_size = priv->line_length * priv->ysize; >>>> >>>> + /* >>>> + * Set up video handoff fields for passing video blob to next stage >>>> + * NOTE: >>>> + * This assumes that reserved video memory only uses a single >>>> framebuffer >>>> + */ >>>> + if (spl_phase() == PHASE_SPL && CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(BLOBLIST)) { >>>> + struct video_handoff *ho; >>>> + >>>> + ho = bloblist_add(BLOBLISTT_U_BOOT_VIDEO, sizeof(*ho), 0); >>>> + if (!ho) >>>> + return log_msg_ret("blf", -ENOENT); >>>> + ho->fb = gd->video_bottom; >>>> + ho->size = gd->video_top - gd->video_bottom; >>> >>> should be plat->base and plat->size >>> >> >> plat->size contains the unaligned size actually. While reserving video >> memory, >> the size of allocation is updated [0] as per default alignment (1 MiB) or >> alignment requested by driver. So I thought it is better to pass actual >> allocated size calculated using gd as the next stage receiving hand-off can >> directly skip the region as per passed size. And since I used gd for >> calculating size, I thought to stick to using gd for ho->fb too for >> consistency. >> >> Kindly let me know if any queries. > > This sort of thing would have been useful to put in a comment in the > code, or commit message. > Thanks, will add it in comment and commit message. > I still don't really see why the 'aligned' size isn't already in plat, > after alloc_fb() is called. > alloc_fb doesn't update plat->size as it is kept intact (unaligned) Regards Devarsh > Anyway I will leave this to Anatolij > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >> >> [0]: >> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/blob/u-boot-2023.07.y/drivers/video/video-uclass.c?ref_type=heads#L88 >> >> Regards >> Devarsh >> >>>> + ho->xsize = priv->xsize; >>>> + ho->ysize = priv->ysize; >>>> + ho->line_length = priv->line_length; >>>> + ho->bpix = priv->bpix; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VIDEO_COPY) && plat->copy_base) >>>> priv->copy_fb = map_sysmem(plat->copy_base, plat->size); >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.34.1 >>>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Simon