[PATCH 07/12] arch/x86: Declare edid_info in <asm/screen_info.h>

Thomas Zimmermann tzimmermann at suse.de
Wed Jul 5 18:18:18 AEST 2023

Hi Arnd

Am 30.06.23 um 13:53 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023, at 09:46, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Am 29.06.23 um 15:21 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023, at 15:01, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>> Am 29.06.23 um 14:35 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023, at 13:45, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>> FIRMWARE_EDID is a user-selectable feature, while ARCH_HAS_EDID_INFO
>>>> announces an architecture feature. They do different things.
>>> I still have trouble seeing the difference.
>> The idea here is that ARCH_HAS_ signals the architecture's support for
>> the feature.  Drivers set 'depends on' in their Kconfig.
>> Another Kconfig token, VIDEO_SCREEN_INFO or FIRMWARE_EDID, would then
>> actually enable the feature.  Drivers select VIDEO_SCREEN_INFO or
>> FIRMWARE_EDID and the architectures contains code like
> Fair enough. In that case, I guess FIRMWARE_EDID will just depend on
> ARCH_HAS_EDID_INFO, or possibly "depends on FIRMWARE_EDID || EFI"
> after it starts calling into an EFI specific function, right?
>> struct screen_info screen_info = {
>> 	/* set values here */
>> }
>> #endif
>> This allows us to disable code that requires screen_info/edid_info, but
>> also disable screen_info/edid_info unless such code has been enabled in
>> the kernel config.
>> Some architectures currently mimic this by guarding screen_info with
>> ifdef CONFIG_VT or similar. I'd like to make this more flexible. The
>> cost of a few more internal Kconfig tokens seems negligible.
> I definitely get it for the screen_info, which needs the complexity.
> For ARCHARCH_HAS_EDID_INFO I would hope that it's never selected by
> anything other than x86, so I would still go with just a dependency
> on x86 for simplicity, but I don't mind having the extra symbol if that
> keeps it more consistent with how the screen_info is handled.

Well, I'd like to add edid_info to platforms with EFI. What would be 
arm/arm64 and loongarch, I guess. See below for the future plans.

>>> I suppose you could use FIRMWARE_EDID on EFI or OF systems without
>>> the need for a global edid_info structure, but that would not
>>> share any code with the current fb_firmware_edid() function.
>> The current code is build on top of screen_info and edid_info. I'd
>> preferably not replace that, if possible.
> One way I could imagine this looking in the end would be
> something like
> struct screen_info *fb_screen_info(struct device *dev)
> {
>        struct screen_info *si = NULL;
>        if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI))
>              si = efi_get_screen_info(dev);
>              si = screen_info;
>        return si;
> }
> corresponding to fb_firmware_edid(). With this, any driver
> that wants to access screen_info would call this function
> instead of using the global pointer, plus either NULL pointer
> check or a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SCREEN_INFO dependency.
> This way we could completely eliminate the global screen_info
> on arm64, riscv, and loongarch but still use the efi and
> hyperv framebuffer/drm drivers.

If possible, I'd like to remove global screen_info and edid_info 
entirely from fbdev and the various consoles.

We currently use screen_info to set up the generic framebuffer device in 
drivers/firmware/sysfb.c. I'd like to use edid_info here as well, so 
that the generic graphics drivers can get EDID information.

For the few fbdev drivers and consoles that require the global 
screen_info/edid_info, I'd rather provide lookup functions in sysfb 
(e.g., sysfb_get_screen_info(), sysfb_get_edid_info()). The global 
screen_info/edid_info state would then become an internal artifact of 
the sysfb code.

Hopefully that explains some of the decisions made in this patchset.

Best regards

>      Arnd

Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman
HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20230705/8d384ce2/attachment.sig>

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list