Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
---
This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
index cb84d185d73a..9333f7095acd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
@@ -268,6 +268,8 @@ static int msm_dsi_manager_panel_init(struct drm_connector *conn, u8 id)
return PTR_ERR(panel);
}
+ drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel(conn, panel);
+
if (!panel || !IS_BONDED_DSI())
goto out;
base-commit: 15b9ca1641f0c3cd74885280331e9172c62a125e
--
https://chromeos.dev
On 7/6/2022 12:14 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>
> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> index cb84d185d73a..9333f7095acd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> @@ -268,6 +268,8 @@ static int msm_dsi_manager_panel_init(struct drm_connector *conn, u8 id)
> return PTR_ERR(panel);
> }
>
> + drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel(conn, panel);
> +
This should be moved below the !panel check since you are passing panel
as one of the params.
I looked up the doc and it says that for unknown(default cases) this is
a no-op so I think this change is fine otherwise.
"It is allowed to call this function with a panel_orientation of
DRM_MODE_PANEL_ORIENTATION_UNKNOWN, in which case it is a no-op."
> if (!panel || !IS_BONDED_DSI())
> goto out;
>
>
> base-commit: 15b9ca1641f0c3cd74885280331e9172c62a125e
Quoting Abhinav Kumar (2022-07-07 14:11:08)
>
>
> On 7/6/2022 12:14 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> > i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> > already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> > take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> > warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
> >
> > Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> > to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> > index cb84d185d73a..9333f7095acd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c
> > @@ -268,6 +268,8 @@ static int msm_dsi_manager_panel_init(struct drm_connector *conn, u8 id)
> > return PTR_ERR(panel);
> > }
> >
> > + drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel(conn, panel);
> > +
>
> This should be moved below the !panel check since you are passing panel
> as one of the params.
drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() checks for a NULL panel
pointer and sets to UNKNOWN. If I moved this below the !panel check then
I'd have to split that condition for !IS_BONDED_DSI() which was more
diff.
>
> I looked up the doc and it says that for unknown(default cases) this is
> a no-op so I think this change is fine otherwise.
>
> "It is allowed to call this function with a panel_orientation of
> DRM_MODE_PANEL_ORIENTATION_UNKNOWN, in which case it is a no-op."
Ok, so you're fine with this patch?
>
>
> > if (!panel || !IS_BONDED_DSI())
> > goto out;
> >
> >
> > base-commit: 15b9ca1641f0c3cd74885280331e9172c62a125e
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>
> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
"the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
code...
See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
Thus:
Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
On 7/8/2022 8:25 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
>> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
>> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
>> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
>> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>>
>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>
>> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
>> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
> code...
>
> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
>
> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
Right, from what I saw on IRC, panel_bridge is the way forward and
dmitry did push a change to do that
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/492585/
But I think we can go ahead with this change because its simple enough.
Regarding the panel_bridge migration, I am going to start reviewing that
as well.
>
> Thus:
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>
> I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
> merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
> the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
> drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
On 7/8/2022 9:00 AM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On 7/8/2022 8:25 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
>>> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
>>> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
>>> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
>>> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>>>
>>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
>>> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
>> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
>> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
>> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
>> code...
>>
>> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
>> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
>>
>> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
>> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
>> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
>> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
>
> Right, from what I saw on IRC, panel_bridge is the way forward and
> dmitry did push a change to do that
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/492585/
>
> But I think we can go ahead with this change because its simple enough.
>
> Regarding the panel_bridge migration, I am going to start reviewing that
> as well.
>
I did some more digging up on the panel_bridge migration.
Dmitry has posted this towards december last year
https://patches.linaro.org/project/dri-devel/patch/[email protected]/
and I had given my R-b on this already in Jan.
I am not sure why this change was dropped OR was not part of msm-next
already.
Dmitry, any reason this change was left out so long and why the R-b was
not retained and this was reposted?
From what i can see the change looks identical.
Thanks
Abhinav
>>
>> Thus:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>>
>> I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
>> merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
>> the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
>> drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
On 7/8/2022 1:58 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 22:42, Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/8/2022 9:00 AM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/8/2022 8:25 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
>>>>> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
>>>>> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
>>>>> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
>>>>> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
>>>>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
>>>>> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
>>>> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
>>>> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
>>>> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
>>>> code...
>>>>
>>>> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
>>>> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
>>>>
>>>> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
>>>> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
>>>> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
>>>> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
>>>
>>> Right, from what I saw on IRC, panel_bridge is the way forward and
>>> dmitry did push a change to do that
>>>
>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/492585/
>>>
>>> But I think we can go ahead with this change because its simple enough.
>>>
>>> Regarding the panel_bridge migration, I am going to start reviewing that
>>> as well.
>>>
>>
>> I did some more digging up on the panel_bridge migration.
>>
>> Dmitry has posted this towards december last year
>>
>> https://patches.linaro.org/project/dri-devel/patch/[email protected]/
>>
>>
>> and I had given my R-b on this already in Jan.
>>
>> I am not sure why this change was dropped OR was not part of msm-next
>> already.
>>
>> Dmitry, any reason this change was left out so long and why the R-b was
>> not retained and this was reposted?
>>
>> From what i can see the change looks identical.
>
> I don't remember if it is identical or not. Basically it was postponed
> to allow DSC to flow in. We used drm_panel to pass DSC pps data. And
> if we use panel-bridge, we don't get a handle of the panel.
> Later on I have posted the series moving DSC pps pointer from
> drm_panel to mipi_dsi_device (which is logical anyway, since it's not
> only the panel, who can provide the DSC pps info, some bridges can
> process DSC-compressed data). But since that time it received no
> feedback.
Thanks for the details.
I will try to review the DRM core bits. But I guess for them to land, we
need some of the core maintainers to pitch in on that.
>
>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 22:42, Abhinav Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/8/2022 9:00 AM, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 7/8/2022 8:25 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> >>> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> >>> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> >>> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> >>> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
> >>>
> >>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> >>> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
> >>>
> >>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
> >> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
> >> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
> >> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
> >> code...
> >>
> >> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
> >> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
> >>
> >> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
> >> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
> >> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
> >> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
> >
> > Right, from what I saw on IRC, panel_bridge is the way forward and
> > dmitry did push a change to do that
> >
> > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/492585/
> >
> > But I think we can go ahead with this change because its simple enough.
> >
> > Regarding the panel_bridge migration, I am going to start reviewing that
> > as well.
> >
>
> I did some more digging up on the panel_bridge migration.
>
> Dmitry has posted this towards december last year
>
> https://patches.linaro.org/project/dri-devel/patch/[email protected]/
>
>
> and I had given my R-b on this already in Jan.
>
> I am not sure why this change was dropped OR was not part of msm-next
> already.
>
> Dmitry, any reason this change was left out so long and why the R-b was
> not retained and this was reposted?
>
> From what i can see the change looks identical.
I don't remember if it is identical or not. Basically it was postponed
to allow DSC to flow in. We used drm_panel to pass DSC pps data. And
if we use panel-bridge, we don't get a handle of the panel.
Later on I have posted the series moving DSC pps pointer from
drm_panel to mipi_dsi_device (which is logical anyway, since it's not
only the panel, who can provide the DSC pps info, some bridges can
process DSC-compressed data). But since that time it received no
feedback.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 8:25 AM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> > i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> > already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> > take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> > warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
> >
> > Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> > to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
> code...
>
> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
>
> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
>
> Thus:
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>
> I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
> merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
> the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
> drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
if you want to land this patch via drm-misc, which might be the
easier/faster route, then:
Acked-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
BR,
-R
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 1:46 PM Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 8:25 AM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> > > i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> > > already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> > > take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> > > warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
> > >
> > > Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> > > to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
> > >
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
> > "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
> > move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
> > general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
> > code...
> >
> > See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
> > panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
> >
> > Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
> > definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
> > blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
> > we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
> >
> > Thus:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> >
> > I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
> > merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
> > the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
> > drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
>
> if you want to land this patch via drm-misc, which might be the
> easier/faster route, then:
>
> Acked-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
As per discussion on IRC, I'm not going to apply this to drm-misc-next.
Given where we are in the cycle landing in drm-misc-next means it
won't be in mainline for a couple versions and I suspect that'll cause
merge conflicts with Dmitry's series [1]. ...and, of course, if
Dmitry's series lands then we don't even need ${SUBJECT} patch...
So I think the plan is:
1. Snooze waiting for the next -rc1 since
drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() won't be in mainline until
then.
2. If Dmitry's series looks like a long way off, we could land
${SUBJECT} patch in msm-next as a stopgap fix.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]/
-Doug
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 3:42 PM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 1:46 PM Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 8:25 AM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> > > > i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> > > > already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> > > > take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> > > > warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> > > > Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> > > > to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
> > > >
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
> > > "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
> > > move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
> > > general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
> > > code...
> > >
> > > See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
> > > panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
> > >
> > > Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
> > > definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
> > > blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
> > > we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
> > >
> > > Thus:
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
> > > merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
> > > the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
> > > drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
> >
> > if you want to land this patch via drm-misc, which might be the
> > easier/faster route, then:
> >
> > Acked-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
>
> As per discussion on IRC, I'm not going to apply this to drm-misc-next.
>
> Given where we are in the cycle landing in drm-misc-next means it
> won't be in mainline for a couple versions and I suspect that'll cause
> merge conflicts with Dmitry's series [1]. ...and, of course, if
> Dmitry's series lands then we don't even need ${SUBJECT} patch...
>
> So I think the plan is:
>
> 1. Snooze waiting for the next -rc1 since
> drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() won't be in mainline until
> then.
>
> 2. If Dmitry's series looks like a long way off, we could land
> ${SUBJECT} patch in msm-next as a stopgap fix.
>
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]/
Just checking up. What's the latest thinking here? Do we want to land
Stephen's change as a stopgap?
drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() is available in v6.0-rc1.
-Doug
Hi Doug
On 8/17/2022 1:48 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 3:42 PM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 1:46 PM Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 8:25 AM Doug Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:14 PM Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
>>>>> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
>>>>> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
>>>>> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
>>>>> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
>>>>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
>>>>> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/dsi_manager.c | 2 ++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> I don't personally have objections to this, but (to my understanding)
>>>> "the future" is that everyone should use panel_bridge. If we made the
>>>> move to panel_bridge today then we wouldn't need to do this. In
>>>> general I think panel_bridge would end up letting us delete a bunch of
>>>> code...
>>>>
>>>> See commit 4e5763f03e10 ("drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Wrap panel with
>>>> panel-bridge") for when this was done by ti-sn65dsi86.
>>>>
>>>> Then again, I spent a small amount of time looking into this and it's
>>>> definitely non-trivial. Still likely worthwhile, but not worth
>>>> blocking a tiny fix like this. It also should be fairly obvious that
>>>> we should delete this when we switch to panel_bridge.
>>>>
>>>> Thus:
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> I'll assume that we'll just snooze this commit until drm-misc-next
>>>> merges into a tree that msm-next is based on, which will probably be
>>>> the next -rc1. If desired and Acked I could land this in
>>>> drm-misc-next, but it's probably not worth it?
>>>
>>> if you want to land this patch via drm-misc, which might be the
>>> easier/faster route, then:
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]>
>>
>> As per discussion on IRC, I'm not going to apply this to drm-misc-next.
>>
>> Given where we are in the cycle landing in drm-misc-next means it
>> won't be in mainline for a couple versions and I suspect that'll cause
>> merge conflicts with Dmitry's series [1]. ...and, of course, if
>> Dmitry's series lands then we don't even need ${SUBJECT} patch...
>>
>> So I think the plan is:
>>
>> 1. Snooze waiting for the next -rc1 since
>> drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() won't be in mainline until
>> then.
>>
>> 2. If Dmitry's series looks like a long way off, we could land
>> ${SUBJECT} patch in msm-next as a stopgap fix.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]/
>
> Just checking up. What's the latest thinking here? Do we want to land
> Stephen's change as a stopgap?
> drm_connector_set_orientation_from_panel() is available in v6.0-rc1.
>
> -Doug
As per todays discussion with Rob on IRC, we will start preparing the
tree for the next release. So lets drop this one and take the panel
bridge change instead since my comments on that were minor and can also
be addressed in a follow up change, will take it up and send it over to
Rob with some other changes.
Thanks
Abhinav
On 06/07/2022 22:14, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Set the panel orientation in drm when the panel is directly connected,
> i.e. we're not using an external bridge. The external bridge case is
> already handled by the panel bridge code, so we only update the path we
> take when the panel is directly connected/internal. This silences a
> warning splat coming from __drm_mode_object_add() on Wormdingler boards.
>
> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <[email protected]>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> This relies on commit 5e41b01a7808 ("drm/panel: Add an API to allow drm
> to set orientation from panel") which is in drm-misc
With the msm/dsi being switched to DRM_PANEL_BRIDGE this is no longer
relevant. Dropping this from the queue.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry