Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
To:     Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v3] drm: of: Properly try all possible cases for bridge/panel detection
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:25:35 +0200
Message-Id: <164862868776.152576.939299098675970686.b4-ty@cerno.tech>
In-Reply-To: <20220329132732.628474-1-paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com>
References: <20220329132732.628474-1-paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 15:27:32 +0200, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> While bridge/panel detection was initially relying on the usual
> port/ports-based of graph detection, it was recently changed to
> perform the lookup on any child node that is not port/ports
> instead when such a node is available, with no fallback on the
> usual way.
> 
> This results in breaking detection when a child node is present
> but does not contain any panel or bridge node, even when the
> usual port/ports-based of graph is there.
> 
> [...]

Applied to drm/drm-misc (drm-misc-next-fixes).

Thanks!
Maxime