Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-97866-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <b573ec32-fe07-498c-abe7-f9a16bdc1c21@linux.dev>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 19:25:36 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drm/bridge: Add fwnode based helpers to get the
 next bridge
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Cc: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>, Robert Foss <rfoss@kernel.org>,
 Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
 Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
 David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
 Phong LE <ple@baylibre.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240307172334.1753343-1-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev>
 <20240307172334.1753343-2-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev>
 <CAA8EJpp8tsHi0RhsJXG+r6nOsV3AUC_n6jNHL0Cr6Ku2h3NMog@mail.gmail.com>
 <45f59f31-1f03-4a96-adb6-25c7cdd5e8a1@linux.dev>
 <CAA8EJpqq1-cEke6wEFZFDnpz4tFBcL6HF3=Qtf-8Q3WbogLS8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <c84fcdba-af50-4212-a8e3-f492c2b02ce4@linux.dev>
 <CAA8EJppTcPO3j7GpGcGbKPUjQ=3rTMMOrU1SYR3mtkWLztf2qQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7535b3ba-6bbb-411c-82a4-cd4ac45de1a6@linux.dev>
 <CAA8EJpp3yd33pYweL_exrXMJ3g-m7-yjJrjiVMVMevOadBtt8g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev>
In-Reply-To: <CAA8EJpp3yd33pYweL_exrXMJ3g-m7-yjJrjiVMVMevOadBtt8g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi,


On 2024/3/9 18:39, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 at 11:33, Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 2024/3/8 04:40, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> But really, there is nothing so hard about it:
>>>>> - Change of_node to fw_node, apply an automatic patch changing this in
>>>>> bridge drivers.
>>>>> - Make drm_of_bridge functions convert passed of_node and comp
>>>>>
>>>>> After this we can start cleaning up bridge drivers to use fw_node API
>>>>> natively as you did in your patches 2-4.
>>>> Yes, it's not so hard. But I'm a little busy due to other downstream developing
>>>> tasks. Sorry, very sorry!
>>>>
>>>> During the talk with you, I observed that you are very good at fwnode domain.
>>>> Are you willing to help the community to do something? For example, currently
>>>> the modern drm bridge framework is corrupted by legacy implement, is it possible
>>>> for us to migrate them to modern? Instead of rotting there? such as the lontium-lt9611uxc.c
>>>> which create a drm connector manually, not modernized yet and it's DT dependent.
>>>> So, there are a lot things to do.
>>> Actually, lontium-lt9611uxc.c does both of that ???? It supports
>>> creating a connector and it as well supports attaching to a chain
>>> without creating a connector. Pretty nice, isn't it?
>>
>> But why the drm_bridge_connector helpers and/or the drm_connector bridge can't suit you need?
>> Coding this way just add boilerplate into drm bridge subsystem, right?
> Because there are platforms, like iMX LCDIF which can use the
> lt9611uxc bridge, but do not make use of the drm_bridge_connector yet.
>

Well, I have just grepped across the drm-tip kernel branch, but I don't find
iMX LCDIF you mentioned. See the search results pasted at bellow.


$ find . -name "*.dts" -type f | xargs grep "lontium,lt9611uxc"
/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-hdk.dts:		compatible = "lontium,lt9611uxc";
/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb5165-rb5.dts:		compatible = "lontium,lt9611uxc";
/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb2210-rb1.dts:		compatible = "lontium,lt9611uxc";
/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb4210-rb2.dts:		compatible = "lontium,lt9611uxc";
/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350-hdk.dts:		compatible = "lontium,lt9611uxc";


So I can't see the drm driver that you refer to, can you pointed it out for study
purpose? Even it's exist, however, back to that time, why don't you posting a patch
to switch it to the canonical design as you mentioned and give the community a clean
design?
  
And those are just *reasons*, from the viewpoint of the *result*.
The merged patch results in a 'side-by-side' implement and boilerplate added
into drm bridges subsystem, the results doesn't change no matter what the
reason is, right?