On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 22:42, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > 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. I don't remember if it is identical or not. Basically it was postponed to allow DSC to flow in. We used drm_panel to pass DSC pps data. And if we use panel-bridge, we don't get a handle of the panel. Later on I have posted the series moving DSC pps pointer from drm_panel to mipi_dsi_device (which is logical anyway, since it's not only the panel, who can provide the DSC pps info, some bridges can process DSC-compressed data). But since that time it received no feedback. -- With best wishes Dmitry