On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 05:08:19PM +0800, Nickey Yang wrote: > From: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Bridge drivers/helpers shouldn't be clobbering the drvdata, since a > parent driver might need to own this. Instead, let's return our > 'dw_mipi_dsi' object and have callers pass that back to us for removal. > > Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/ > > --- > Changes > > v4: > - Add From tag,update subject line > - keep patch "drm/stm: dsi: Adjust dw_mipi_dsi_probe and remove" > in this piece together. > > v5: > - remove Review & Ack tag > - fix remove() directly referencing the static > dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data struct. You've gotten this back into basically the shape I sent v1 in, so I guess this deserves an: Acked-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> :) Only net changes: you renamed the 'dsi' field to 'dmd' (Dwc Mipi Device?), and my 'return 0' changed back to the original 'return ret' at the end of probe(). Doesn't make any functional difference, so fine with me. If everybody's just as happy with this as with the first version...should it just be applied now, regardless of the status of the next 2 patches? Could help reduce the discussion (and confusion) surface. Regards, Brian > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 36 ++++++++++----------------- > drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c | 10 +++++--- > include/drm/bridge/dw_mipi_dsi.h | 17 ++++++++----- > 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) ... _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
