Hello Sui, Sam!
Thanks for the review.
(Sorry for delayed response. I was OoO last week)
On 31/05/24 19:34, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
Hi, Jayesh
On 5/31/24 21:33, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
Hi Jayesh,
+
static const struct drm_bridge_funcs sii902x_bridge_funcs = {
.attach = sii902x_bridge_attach,
.mode_set = sii902x_bridge_mode_set,
@@ -516,6 +529,7 @@ static const struct drm_bridge_funcs
sii902x_bridge_funcs = {
.atomic_destroy_state = drm_atomic_helper_bridge_destroy_state,
.atomic_get_input_bus_fmts =
sii902x_bridge_atomic_get_input_bus_fmts,
.atomic_check = sii902x_bridge_atomic_check,
+ .mode_valid = sii902x_bridge_mode_valid,
As you have the possibility to test the driver, it would be nice with a
follow-up patch that replaces the use of enable() / disable() with the
atomic counterparts.
enable() / disable() are deprecated, so it is nice to reduce their use.
I agree with Sam.
Please using atomic uniformally with a follow-up patch, the mixed
using of atomic API and non atomic API is a little bit confusing IMO.
I will change the enable and disable to their atomic counter parts in
the next revision.
Warm Regards,
-Jayesh
