Hi Sam, On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:43:52AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 03:36:36AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Make the connector creation optional to enable usage of the > > simple-bridge with the DRM bridge connector helper. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Looks straightforward. > Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Some rambling below you can ignore. > > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c | 11 ++++------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > index bac223d0430d..bad638088029 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/simple-bridge.c > > @@ -101,16 +101,14 @@ static int simple_bridge_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge, > > struct simple_bridge *sbridge = drm_bridge_to_simple_bridge(bridge); > > The code below uses both sbridge-> and bridge-> > It confused me that we access via bridge-> when possilbe and only > reverts to the "upper" sbridge when needed. > This is unrelated to this patch - just an observation. > It makes code shorter so I can see why it is done. > > > int ret; > > > > - if (flags & DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR) { > > - DRM_ERROR("Fix bridge driver to make connector optional!"); > > - return -EINVAL; > > - } > > - > > ret = drm_bridge_attach(bridge->encoder, sbridge->next_bridge, bridge, > > DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR); > > if (ret < 0) > > return ret; > > > > + if (flags & DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR) > > + return 0; > > + > > if (!bridge->encoder) { > > DRM_ERROR("Missing encoder\n"); > > return -ENODEV; > > @@ -127,8 +125,7 @@ static int simple_bridge_attach(struct drm_bridge *bridge, > > return ret; > > } > > > > - drm_connector_attach_encoder(&sbridge->connector, > > - bridge->encoder); > > + drm_connector_attach_encoder(&sbridge->connector, bridge->encoder); > > Unrelated change, but patch is trivial... I tend not to split trivial cleanups like these in separate patches, should I ? > > > > return 0; > > } -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart