On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 02:38:49AM +0000, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-10-24 at 12:23 +0200, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> > you have verified the sender or the content.
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 10:16:05AM +0000, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your information.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2024-10-24 at 11:47 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > >
> > > > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments
> > until
> > > > you have verified the sender or the content.
> > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 05:37:13PM +0800, Jason-JH.Lin via B4
> > Relay
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > From: "Jason-JH.Lin" <jason-jh.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > This reverts commit ac88a1f41f93499df6f50fd18ea835e6ff4f3200.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reason for revert:
> > > > > 1. The commit [1] does not land on linux-5.15, so this patch
> > does
> > > > not
> > > > > fix anything.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Since the fw_device improvements series [2] does not land on
> > > > > linux-5.15, using device_set_fwnode() causes the panel to flash
> > > > during
> > > > > bootup.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incorrect link management may lead to incorrect device
> > > > initialization,
> > > > > affecting firmware node links and consumer relationships.
> > > > > The fwnode setting of panel to the DSI device would cause a DSI
> > > > > initialization error without series[2], so this patch was
> > reverted
> > > > to
> > > > > avoid using the incomplete fw_devlink functionality.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] commit 3fb16866b51d ("driver core: fw_devlink: Make cycle
> > > > detection more robust")
> > > > > [2] Link:
> > > >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230207014207.1678715-1-saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Please don't mind me make a confirmation.
> > > I just need to add this line here and send it again, right?
> > >
> > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> #5.15.169
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Thanks for your confirmation!
>
> I've sent the patch again without adding `v2` after the [PATCH]:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241024-fixup-5-15-v1-1-62f21a32b5a5@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Would that be fine with you?
But it is a v2 patch, why not mark it as such?
