On 24.11.22 12:00, Alexander Stein wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 22. November 2022, 09:12:18 CET schrieb Frieder Schrempf:
>> From: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The datasheet specifies a delay of 10 milliseconds, but the current
>> driver only waits for 1 ms. Fix this to make sure the initialization
>> sequence meets the spec.
>>
>> Fixes: ceb515ba29ba ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi83: Add TI SN65DSI83 and
>> SN65DSI84 driver") Signed-off-by: Frieder Schrempf
>> <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c index 7ba9467fff12..047c14ddbbf1
>> 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi83.c
>> @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ static void sn65dsi83_atomic_enable(struct drm_bridge
>> *bridge,
>>
>> /* Deassert reset */
>> gpiod_set_value_cansleep(ctx->enable_gpio, 1);
>> - usleep_range(1000, 1100);
>> + usleep_range(10000, 11000);
>>
>> /* Get the LVDS format from the bridge state. */
>> bridge_state = drm_atomic_get_new_bridge_state(state, bridge);
>
> How about using fsleep?
>
> Either way:
> Reviewed-by: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for the review! I didn't know about fsleep. Anyway this would
probably be a separate change as the driver currently uses usleep
everywhere else. But I will keep it in mind for the future.
