Hi Souptick, On Friday, 28 September 2018 23:02:32 EEST Souptick Joarder wrote: > On 28-Sep-2018 9:00 PM, "Laurent Pinchart" wrote: > > On Friday, 28 September 2018 18:05:18 EEST Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Thursday, 27 September 2018 09:34:18 EEST Souptick Joarder wrote: > >>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:05 PM Souptick Joarder wrote: > >>>> convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use > >>>> drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume(). > >>>> > >>>> remove suspend_state field from the rcar_du_device > >>>> structure as it is no more required. > >>>> > >>>> With this conversion, also drm_fbdev_cma_set_suspend_unlocked() > >>>> will left with no consumer. So this function can be removed. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Laurent, any comment on this patch ?? > >> > >> Sorry for the delay, and thanks for pinging me. > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Should I apply this to my tree or do you plan to merge it through > >> drm-misc as it touches drm_fb_cma_helper.c ? > > > > I just realized that the same patch got supplied by Noralf Trønnes nearly > > a year ago, and was later superseded by https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/ > > patch/247861/. I think we should thus apply Noralf's patches instead (once > > he sends v4 out). > > Sure, you can go ahead with his patch. > > Shall I remove drm_fbdev_cma_set_suspend_unlocked in a separate patch once > all the consumer remove this function ? Sure, if the function isn't removed as part of Noralf's patch series, please send a separate patch to remove it. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
