Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-97890-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
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>
 <b573ec32-fe07-498c-abe7-f9a16bdc1c21@linux.dev>
In-Reply-To: <b573ec32-fe07-498c-abe7-f9a16bdc1c21@linux.dev>
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 14:50:47 +0200
Message-ID: <CAA8EJpo1Zk5Z80Jh24ygJH-djfHrLK7wVC8AFe99AOetWpmUgw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drm/bridge: Add fwnode based helpers to get the
 next bridge
To: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev>
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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 at 13:25, Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On 2024/3/9 18:39, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 at 11:33, Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> wrot=
e:
> >> 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 A=
PI
> >>>>> 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 fwnod=
e 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 D=
T dependent.
> >>>> So, there are a lot things to do.
> >>> Actually, lontium-lt9611uxc.c does both of that =F0=9F=98=89 It suppo=
rts
> >>> 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 brid=
ge 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 f=
ind
> iMX LCDIF you mentioned. See the search results pasted at bellow.

Please take a look at the commit 8ddce13ae696 ("drm/bridge: lt9611: Do
not generate HFP/HBP/HSA and EOT packet"). As you can see from the
description, Marek has been using this bridge with th iMX8MM / iMX8MP
boards. As soon as mxsfb has been updated to pass
DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR, we can drop corresponding code from
LT9611UXC driver.

> $ find . -name "*.dts" -type f | xargs grep "lontium,lt9611uxc"
> ./arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450-hdk.dts:           compatible =3D "lontium,l=
t9611uxc";
> ./arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb5165-rb5.dts:          compatible =3D "lontium,l=
t9611uxc";
> ./arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb2210-rb1.dts:          compatible =3D "lontium,l=
t9611uxc";
> ./arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb4210-rb2.dts:          compatible =3D "lontium,l=
t9611uxc";
> ./arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350-hdk.dts:           compatible =3D "lontium,l=
t9611uxc";
>
>
> So I can't see the drm driver that you refer to, can you pointed it out f=
or study
> purpose? Even it's exist, however, back to that time, why don't you posti=
ng a patch
> to switch it to the canonical design as you mentioned and give the commun=
ity a clean
> design?

If you have iMX8 hardware, please do it. I don't have these boards and
I do not have an intention of acquiring them.

> And those are just *reasons*, from the viewpoint of the *result*.
> The merged patch results in a 'side-by-side' implement and boilerplate ad=
ded
> into drm bridges subsystem, the results doesn't change no matter what the
> reason is, right?

--=20
With best wishes
Dmitry