> Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/4] drm: rcar-du: mipi-dsi: Support bridge probe
> ordering
>
> Quoting Biju Das (2021-11-26 14:19:35)
> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/4] drm: rcar-du: mipi-dsi: Support bridge
> > > probe ordering
> > >
> > > Quoting Biju Das (2021-11-26 10:51:48)
> > > > Hi Kieran,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the patch.
> > > >
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH 4/4] drm: rcar-du: mipi-dsi: Support bridge
> > > > > probe ordering
> > > > >
> > > > > The bridge probe ordering for DSI devices has been clarified and
> > > > > further documented in
> > > > >
> > > > > To support connecting with the SN65DSI86 device after commit
> > > > > c3b75d4734cb
> > > > > ("drm/bridge: sn65dsi86: Register and attach our DSI device at
> > > > > probe"), update to the new probe ordering to remove a perpetual
> > > > > -EPROBE_DEFER loop between the two devices.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham
> > > > > <kieran.bingham+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_mipi_dsi.c | 48
> > > > > +++++++++++++------------
> > > > > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_mipi_dsi.c
> > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_mipi_dsi.c
> > > > > index 833f4480bdf3..f783bacee8da 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_mipi_dsi.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rcar-du/rcar_mipi_dsi.c
> > > > > @@ -639,6 +639,8 @@ static int rcar_mipi_dsi_host_attach(struct
> > > > > mipi_dsi_host *host,
> > > > > struct mipi_dsi_device
> > > > > *device) {
> > > > > struct rcar_mipi_dsi *dsi = host_to_rcar_mipi_dsi(host);
> > > > > + struct drm_panel *panel;
> > > > > + int ret;
> > > > >
> > > > > if (device->lanes > dsi->num_data_lanes)
> > > > > return -EINVAL;
> > > > > @@ -646,12 +648,36 @@ static int
> > > > > rcar_mipi_dsi_host_attach(struct mipi_dsi_host *host,
> > > > > dsi->lanes = device->lanes;
> > > > > dsi->format = device->format;
> > > > >
> > > > > + ret = drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(dsi->dev->of_node, 1, 0,
> > > &panel,
> > > > > + &dsi->next_bridge);
> > > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > > + dev_err_probe(dsi->dev, ret, "could not find next
> > > bridge\n");
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > >
> > > > This can merged with previous line. return dev_err_probe(dsi->dev,
> > > > ret, "could not find next bridge\n");
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (!dsi->next_bridge) {
> > > > > + dsi->next_bridge =
> > > > > + devm_drm_panel_bridge_add(dsi->dev,
> > > panel);
> > > > > + if (IS_ERR(dsi->next_bridge)) {
> > > > > + dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to create panel
> > > bridge\n");
> > > > > + return PTR_ERR(dsi->next_bridge);
> > > >
> > > > Why not return dev_err_probe??
> > >
> > > Yes, I think it probably should. This was just a code move, so I
> > > didn't change it.
> >
> > OK. Do you have any plan to add DSI{0,1} in rcar_du_output_name[1] or is
> it in pipeline?
> >
>
> Aha, no I've missed that.
>
> If you'd like to submit the patch, then please do. Otherwise I'll send one
> next week.
I prefer you to submit the patch next week, since nothing ready for DSI
from my side.
Regards,
Biju
