Hi Kishon, On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 05:43:12PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > On 05/02/19 2:16 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 03:33:31PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 21/01/19 9:15 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Here is a set of patches to allow the phy framework consumers to test and > >>> apply runtime configurations. > >>> > >>> This is needed to support more phy classes that require tuning based on > >>> parameters depending on the current use case of the device, in addition to > >>> the power state management already provided by the current functions. > >>> > >>> A first test bed for that API are the MIPI D-PHY devices. There's a number > >>> of solutions that have been used so far to support these phy, most of the > >>> time being an ad-hoc driver in the consumer. > >>> > >>> That approach has a big shortcoming though, which is that this is quite > >>> difficult to deal with consumers integrated with multiple variants of phy, > >>> of multiple consumers integrated with the same phy. > >>> > >>> The latter case can be found in the Cadence DSI bridge, and the CSI > >>> transceiver and receivers. All of them are integrated with the same phy, or > >>> can be integrated with different phy, depending on the implementation. > >>> > >>> I've looked at all the MIPI DSI drivers I could find, and gathered all the > >>> parameters I could find. The interface should be complete, and most of the > >>> drivers can be converted in the future. The current set converts two of > >>> them: the above mentionned Cadence DSI driver so that the v4l2 drivers can > >>> use them, and the Allwinner MIPI-DSI driver. > >> > >> Can the PHY changes go independently of the consumer drivers? or else I'll need > >> ACKs from the GPU MAINTAINER. > > > > Maxime is a gpu maintainer, so you're all good :-) > > cool.. I've merged all the patches except drm/bridge. > > Please see if everything looks okay once it shows up in phy -next (give a day) Thanks! If possible (and if that's still an option), it would be better if the sun6i related patches (patches 4 and 5) would go through the DRM tree (with your Acked-by of course). We have a number of patches in flight that have a decent chance to conflict with patch 4. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
