Hi Brian,
On 2017年12月06日 02:56, Brian Norris wrote:
Hi Nickey,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 05:14:11PM +0800, Nickey Yang wrote:
On 2017年12月01日 18:07, Philippe CORNU wrote:
On 12/01/2017 10:11 AM, Nickey Yang wrote:
On 2017年12月01日 16:32, Philippe CORNU wrote:
I am sorry to say that but you can not add my "Acked-by" to this patch
because this code is different from the "original" one from Brian (which
got my "Acked-by").
I'm sorry I didn't think much about it, Thank you for correcting me.
Sometimes it is not an issue because differences are not important but
in this particular case, the code is really different: you have remove
platform_set_drvdata() & platform_get_drvdata() in the stm part.
Could you please go back to the original code or propose me an updated
version of this code.
Could you help update new version of this code(stm part) and then test on
stm platform?
I think you can simply goes back to the original version from Brian (see
the discussion thread in https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/)
unless you have specific/good reasons for modifying the code as you did.
mmm,I'm sorry, I feel a little puzzled. Do you means we should abandon
Brian's patch (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/)?
I think we need to adjust stm part because dw_mipi_dsi_stm.c calls
bridge's drivers if we want merge Brian's patch.
It's really simple. Your code is different from the patch I sent, and in
a way that Philippe did not like. I'll highlight it again below:
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c
index e5b6310..80f9950 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c
@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ enum dsi_color {
struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm {
void __iomem *base;
struct clk *pllref_clk;
+ struct dw_mipi_dsi *dmd;
};
static inline void dsi_write(struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi, u32 reg, u32 val)
@@ -318,10 +319,11 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.base = dsi->base;
dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data = dsi;
- ret = dw_mipi_dsi_probe(pdev, &dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data);
- if (ret) {
+ dsi->dmd = dw_mipi_dsi_probe(pdev, &dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data);
+ if (IS_ERR(dsi->dmd)) {
DRM_ERROR("Failed to initialize mipi dsi host\n");
clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk);
+ return PTR_ERR(dsi->dmd);
}
return ret;
@@ -332,7 +334,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data;
clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk);
- dw_mipi_dsi_remove(pdev);
+ dw_mipi_dsi_remove(dsi->dmd);
return 0;
}
Above is your diff for dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c. Particularly, notice that
remove() is directly referencing the static dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data
struct.
If you look back at my patch [1] you'll see that you're missing hunks
like this:
Thank you for pointing out my mistake.
I will fix this in next version.
Nickey.
static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
- struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data;
+ struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk);
[...]
Brian
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
