Hi Brian, On 2017?12?06? 02:56, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Nickey, > > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 05:14:11PM +0800, Nickey Yang wrote: >> On 2017?12?01? 18:07, Philippe CORNU wrote: >>> On 12/01/2017 10:11 AM, Nickey Yang wrote: >>>> On 2017?12?01? 16:32, Philippe CORNU wrote: >>>>> I am sorry to say that but you can not add my "Acked-by" to this patch >>>>> because this code is different from the "original" one from Brian (which >>>>> got my "Acked-by"). >>>> I'm sorry I didn't think much about it, Thank you for correcting me. >>>>> Sometimes it is not an issue because differences are not important but >>>>> in this particular case, the code is really different: you have remove >>>>> platform_set_drvdata() & platform_get_drvdata() in the stm part. >>>>> >>>>> Could you please go back to the original code or propose me an updated >>>>> version of this code. >>>> Could you help update new version of this code(stm part) and then test on >>>> stm platform? >>> I think you can simply goes back to the original version from Brian (see >>> the discussion thread in https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/) >>> unless you have specific/good reasons for modifying the code as you did. >> mmm,I'm sorry, I feel a little puzzled. Do you means we should abandon >> Brian's patch (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/)? >> I think we need to adjust stm part because? dw_mipi_dsi_stm.c calls >> bridge's drivers if we want merge Brian's patch. > It's really simple. Your code is different from the patch I sent, and in > a way that Philippe did not like. I'll highlight it again below: > >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c >>>>>> index e5b6310..80f9950 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c >>>>>> @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ enum dsi_color { >>>>>> struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm { >>>>>> void __iomem *base; >>>>>> struct clk *pllref_clk; >>>>>> + struct dw_mipi_dsi *dmd; >>>>>> }; >>>>>> static inline void dsi_write(struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi, u32 reg, u32 val) >>>>>> @@ -318,10 +319,11 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>>> dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.base = dsi->base; >>>>>> dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data = dsi; >>>>>> - ret = dw_mipi_dsi_probe(pdev, &dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data); >>>>>> - if (ret) { >>>>>> + dsi->dmd = dw_mipi_dsi_probe(pdev, &dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data); >>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(dsi->dmd)) { >>>>>> DRM_ERROR("Failed to initialize mipi dsi host\n"); >>>>>> clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk); >>>>>> + return PTR_ERR(dsi->dmd); >>>>>> } >>>>>> return ret; >>>>>> @@ -332,7 +334,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>>> struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data; >>>>>> clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk); >>>>>> - dw_mipi_dsi_remove(pdev); >>>>>> + dw_mipi_dsi_remove(dsi->dmd); >>>>>> return 0; >>>>>> } > > Above is your diff for dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c. Particularly, notice that > remove() is directly referencing the static dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data > struct. > > If you look back at my patch [1] you'll see that you're missing hunks > like this: > Thank you for pointing out my mistake. I will fix this in next version. Nickey. > static int dw_mipi_dsi_stm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > { > - struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = dw_mipi_dsi_stm_plat_data.priv_data; > + struct dw_mipi_dsi_stm *dsi = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > > clk_disable_unprepare(dsi->pllref_clk); > [...] > > Brian > > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10078493/ > > >
