On 05/08/18 10:58, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2018-05-08 08:51, Jyri Sarha wrote: >> On 05/04/18 16:51, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> It gets rid of an #ifdef and the .of_node member is going away. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c | 4 +--- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c >>> index 6d99d4a3beb3..f43d77b5ed20 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/panel.c >>> @@ -169,10 +169,8 @@ struct drm_bridge *drm_panel_bridge_add(struct drm_panel *panel, >>> panel_bridge->connector_type = connector_type; >>> panel_bridge->panel = panel; >>> >>> + panel_bridge->bridge.odev = panel->dev; >> I am afraid this approach will eventually conflict with my lately >> accepted patch[1]. > I don't see how? The links are refcounted. So, if there is one link > each for the panel and bridge between the drm device and the panel > device that link will simply get two references. If/when the panel > device then goes away, the drm device will be brought down because > of that link (with two references, but that is irrelevant). When > the drm device is brought down, it will (presumably) bring down the > bridge as well (which will fix the refcount as the bridge link is > killed as part of that). > I guess you are right. If everything is done correctly the both links should get removed in the tear down situation and all should be fine. > Or have you done some test and seen an actual problem? > No testing, just a hunch. BR, Jyri -- Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
