Hello,
On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 02:34:34PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 7:44 AM Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Slightly awkward to fish out the display_info when we aren't creating
> > own connector. But I don't see an obvious better way.
> >
> > v3:
> > - Rebased and dropped the ti_sn_bridge_get_bpp() patch
> > as this was solved in a different way (Sam)
> >
> > v2:
> > - Remove error return with NO_CONNECTOR flag (Rob)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jonas Karlman <jonas@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 20 +++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> This is fine by me assuming we can fix the previous patches.
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Likewise,
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> NOTE: to me, this isn't something to do _instead_ of my patch [1] but
> _in addition_ to it. ${SUBJECT} patch transitions us to a more modern
> approach of having the connector created elsewhere but doesn't remove
> the old fallback code. Might as well clean the fallback code up unless
> you think it's going to simply be deleted right away or something?
I don't really mind either way, but I of course would favour removal of
connector support as soon as practical :-)
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220204161245.v2.1.I3ab26b7f197cc56c874246a43e57913e9c2c1028@changeid
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
