Hi Maxime,
On Thu 21 Apr 22, 10:23, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 01:15:54PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > + Linus
> > + Marek
> > + Laurent
> > + Robert
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:40 AM Bjorn Andersson
> > <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Commit '80253168dbfd ("drm: of: Lookup if child node has panel or
> > > bridge")' attempted to simplify the case of expressing a simple panel
> > > under a DSI controller, by assuming that the first non-graph child node
> > > was a panel or bridge.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately for non-trivial cases the first child node might not be a
> > > panel or bridge. Examples of this can be a aux-bus in the case of
> > > DisplayPort, or an opp-table represented before the panel node.
> > >
> > > In these cases the reverted commit prevents the caller from ever finding
> > > a reference to the panel.
> > >
> > > This reverts commit '80253168dbfd ("drm: of: Lookup if child node has
> > > panel or bridge")', in favor of using an explicit graph reference to the
> > > panel in the trivial case as well.
> >
> > This eventually breaks many child-based devm_drm_of_get_bridge
> > switched drivers. Do you have any suggestions on how to proceed to
> > succeed in those use cases as well?
>
> I guess we could create a new helper for those, like
> devm_drm_of_get_bridge_with_panel, or something.
Oh wow I feel stupid for not thinking about that.
Yeah I agree that it seems like the best option.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Kocialkowski, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
