On 7/8/2022 9:00 AM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 7/8/2022 8:25 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
"the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
code...
See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
Right, from what I saw on IRC, panel_bridge is the way forward and
dmitry did push a change to do that
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/492585/
But I think we can go ahead with this change because its simple enough.
Regarding the panel_bridge migration, I am going to start reviewing that
as well.
I did some more digging up on the panel_bridge migration.
Dmitry has posted this towards december last year
https://patches.linaro.org/project/dri-devel/patch/20211207222901.988484-3-dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx/
and I had given my R-b on this already in Jan.
I am not sure why this change was dropped OR was not part of msm-next
already.
Dmitry, any reason this change was left out so long and why the R-b was
not retained and this was reposted?
From what i can see the change looks identical.
Thanks
Abhinav
Thus:
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
