On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 06:44:18PM +0200, Andrea Merello wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 05:39:36PM +0200, Andrea Merello wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 04:08:04PM +0200, Andrea Merello wrote: > > > > > Introduce drm_simple_display_pipe_attach_bridge() in order > > > > > to make it possible to use drm encoders with the simple display > > > > > pipes managed by simple_kms_helpers > > > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Merello <andrea.merello@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: Noralf Trønnes <noralf@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Threading of your patch series is somehow broken, usually that should > > all > > > > work nicely if you've set up git send-email. > > > > > > > > One question: Should we ahve a drm_simple_display_pipe_detach_bridge > > (for > > > > cleanup) too? > > > > > > > > > > Unsure if it worths. May be nice to have a balanced pair, but it would > > > probably end up in > > > a quite redundant one-line func, that only calls drm_bridge_detach with > > the > > > very same argument. > > > > > > ..But of course if you want I can add it in v2 series. > > > > Yes it's just going to be a one-line, but it'll do a typecast and so > > better encapsulate the internals of the simple pipe helper. > > > I'm unsure about what do you mean here. Why a typecast? > > Wouldn't it be simply drm_simple_display_pipe_detach_bridge(struct > drm_bridge *bridge) calling in turn drm_detach_bridge(struct drm_bridge > *bridge) with the very same argument? > > Or if you want to stay behind the pipe, then it could be > drm_simple_display_pipe_detach_bridge(struct drm_simple_display_pipe *pipe), > but I would say it just does something like > drm_bridge_detach(pipe->encoder.bridge), so I don't really get your point > about the cast, sorry.. Yeah, the latter is what I mean. That way drivers don't have to dig around in the details of pipe. And it wouldn't be entirely just a wrapper, I think it'd be good to also clear pipe->encoder.bridge to NULL. Or do you think this is entirely pointless? Sometimes I do go overboard with curating pretty little functions ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
