Emil,
Reply inline
On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 9:35 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The helper uses the MIPI_DCS_SET_TEAR_SCANLINE, although it's currently
using the generic write. This does not look right.
Perhaps some platforms don't distinguish between the two writers?
Cc: Robert Chiras <robert.chiras@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Vinay Simha BN <simhavcs@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: e83950816367 ("drm/dsi: Implement set tear scanline")
Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Robert, can you please test this against the only user - the Raydium
RM67191 panel driver that you introduced.
Thanks
Vinay, can you confirm if this is a genuine typo or there's something
really subtle happening.
this has been tested on nexus 7 with jdi panel. I did not understand what is the typo here?
We need to use DC’s write instead of generic write?
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
index b96d5b4629d7..07102d8da58f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
@@ -1082,11 +1082,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(mipi_dsi_dcs_set_pixel_format);
*/
int mipi_dsi_dcs_set_tear_scanline(struct mipi_dsi_device *dsi, u16 scanline)
{
- u8 payload[3] = { MIPI_DCS_SET_TEAR_SCANLINE, scanline >> 8,
- scanline & 0xff };
+ u8 payload[2] = { scanline >> 8, scanline & 0xff };
ssize_t err;
- err = mipi_dsi_generic_write(dsi, payload, sizeof(payload));
+ err = mipi_dsi_dcs_write(dsi, MIPI_DCS_SET_TEAR_SCANLINE, payload,
+ sizeof(payload));
if (err < 0)
return err;
--
2.25.1
regards,
vinaysimha
vinaysimha
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
