Hi Tomi, On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:15:20PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 07/07/2019 21:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far > > been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in > > duplicate code in several bridge drivers, with slightly different (and > > thus confusing) logics. > > > > In order to fix this, implement a bridge driver for display connectors. > > The driver centralises logic for the DVI, HDMI, VGAn composite and > > S-video connectors and exposes corresponding bridge operations. > > > > This driver in itself doesn't solve the issue completely, changes in > > bridge and display controller drivers are needed to make use of the new > > connector driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Kconfig | 11 + > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/Makefile | 1 + > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/display-connector.c | 327 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 339 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/display-connector.c > > > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev, > > + "Found %s display connector '%s' %s DDC bus and %s HPD GPIO (ops 0x%x)\n", > > + display_connector_type_name(conn), > > + conn->label ? conn->label : "<unlabelled>", > > + conn->ddc ? "with" : "without", > > + conn->hpd_gpio ? "with" : "without", > > + conn->bridge.ops); > > dev_dbg()? Many drivers print an info message at probe time when everything goes fine, to inform about the device that has been succesfully probed. Do you think this is overkill and a dev_dbg() would be better ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
