On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:24:36PM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> Hi José
>
> Quoting José Expósito (2022-02-28 18:39:54)
> > The function "drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge" has been deprecated in
> > favor of "devm_drm_of_get_bridge".
> >
> > Switch to the new function and reduce boilerplate.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: José Expósito <jose.exposito89@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 8 +-------
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > index dab8f76618f3..fb8e16ed7e90 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > @@ -1232,15 +1232,9 @@ static int ti_sn_bridge_probe(struct auxiliary_device *adev,
> > {
> > struct ti_sn65dsi86 *pdata = dev_get_drvdata(adev->dev.parent);
> > struct device_node *np = pdata->dev->of_node;
> > - struct drm_panel *panel;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - ret = drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(np, 1, 0, &panel, NULL);
> > - if (ret)
> > - return dev_err_probe(&adev->dev, ret,
> > - "could not find any panel node\n");
> > -
> > - pdata->next_bridge = devm_drm_panel_bridge_add(pdata->dev, panel);
> > + pdata->next_bridge = devm_drm_of_get_bridge(pdata->dev, np, 1, 0);
>
> Yikes, I was about to rely on this panel variable to determine if the
> device is a panel or a display port connector. (Well, I am relying on
> it, and patches are hoping to be reposted this week).
>
> Is there expected to be another way to identify if the next connection
> is a panel or a bridge?
>
> Regards
Hi Kieran,
I'm getting started in the DRM subsystem. I couldn't tell if there is a
good way to access the panel pointer... I didn't manage to find it, but
hopefully someone with more experience can point us to a solution.
Since you mentioned display port, I'm not sure if in your case checking
"pdata->next_bridge->type" could be good enough.
Anyway, if this patch causes you problems, please go ahead and ignore it.
I'm sure the series you are working on are more important than removing
a deprecated function :)
Best wishes,
Jose
