Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-211707-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: <20240612133550.473279-1-tejasvipin76@gmail.com>
 <20240612133550.473279-3-tejasvipin76@gmail.com> <CAD=FV=VTEzSyTHm-YBwneBgpohK8uu460DER-GcsQWu-z9hJsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <9beb8011-cb0f-4694-87e7-d4c02de80cd8@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <9beb8011-cb0f-4694-87e7-d4c02de80cd8@linaro.org>
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 07:52:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=Udsw=XCR204A8QGwVSAxyprLCrrOgmZf+pU+8m-7sQ0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/mipi-dsi: fix handling of ctx in mipi_dsi_msleep
To: neil.armstrong@linaro.org
Cc: Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@gmail.com>, quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com, 
	maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, mripard@kernel.org, tzimmermann@suse.de, 
	airlied@gmail.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, linus.walleij@linaro.org, 
	dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:34=E2=80=AFAM <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 12/06/2024 16:21, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:37=E2=80=AFAM Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@gmail=
.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ctx would be better off treated as a pointer to account for most of it=
s
> >> usage so far, and brackets should be added to account for operator
> >> precedence for correct evaluation.
> >>
> >> Fixes: f79d6d28d8fe7 ("drm/mipi-dsi: wrap more functions for streamlin=
e handling")
> >> Signed-off-by: Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>   include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h | 2 +-
> >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Yeah. Looking closer at the history, it looks like it was always
> > intended to be a pointer since the first users all used it as a
> > pointer.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> >
> > I've also compile-tested all the panels currently using mipi_dsi_msleep=
().
> >
> > Neil: Given that this is a correctness thing, I'd rather see this land
> > sooner rather than later. If you agree, maybe you can land these two
> > patches whenever you're comfortable with them?
>
> Applying them, but inverting them, fix should go first.

Well, they're both fixes, and inverting them means that you get a
compile failure across several panels if you happen to be bisecting
and land on the first commit, but it doesn't really matter. I guess
the compile failure is maybe a benefit given that they were not doing
their delays properly... ;-)

-Doug