Hi, On 06/02/19 5:55 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > 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. Sure. Dropped patches 4 and 5 from my tree. Thanks Kishon
