Hi Jagan
@@ -1503,28 +1506,18 @@ static int samsung_dsim_panel_or_bridge(struct samsung_dsim *dsi, { struct drm_bridge *panel_bridge; struct drm_panel *panel; - struct device_node *remote; - - if (of_graph_is_present(node)) { - remote = of_graph_get_remote_node(node, DSI_PORT_OUT, 0); - if (!remote) - return -ENODEV; + int ret;
- node = remote; - } + ret = drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge(dsi->dev->of_node, 1, 0, &panel, + &panel_bridge); + if (ret) + return ret;
- panel_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(node); - if (!panel_bridge) { - panel = of_drm_find_panel(node); - if (!IS_ERR(panel)) { - panel_bridge = drm_panel_bridge_add(panel); - if (IS_ERR(panel_bridge)) - return PTR_ERR(panel_bridge); - } + if (panel) { + panel_bridge = drm_panel_bridge_add(panel); + if (IS_ERR(panel_bridge)) + return PTR_ERR(panel_bridge); } - - of_node_put(node); - dsi->out_bridge = panel_bridge;
I need to apply this change to register my panel on imx8mn even mode I found that @@ -1594,11 +1587,15 @@ static int samsung_dsim_host_attach(struct mipi_dsi_host *host, return ret; }
- mutex_lock(&drm->mode_config.mutex);
dsi->lanes = device->lanes; dsi->format = device->format; dsi->mode_flags = device->mode_flags; + + if (!drm) + return 0; + + mutex_lock(&drm->mode_config.mutex);
mode_config is not initialized in this path.
Michael
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 8:39 AM Jagan Teki jagan@amarulasolutions.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 9:34 PM Maxime Ripard maxime@cerno.tech wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 09:44:14PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 9:40 PM Maxime Ripard maxime@cerno.tech wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 07:55:41PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 7:45 PM Maxime Ripard maxime@cerno.tech wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 12:02:47AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > > > > > + dsi->panel = of_drm_find_panel(remote); > > > > > > + if (IS_ERR(dsi->panel)) { > > > > > > + dsi->panel = NULL; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + dsi->next_bridge = of_drm_find_bridge(remote); > > > > > > + if (IS_ERR(dsi->next_bridge)) { > > > > > > + dev_err(dsi->dev, "failed to find bridge\n"); > > > > > > + return PTR_ERR(dsi->next_bridge); > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + } else { > > > > > > + dsi->next_bridge = NULL; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + > > > > > > + of_node_put(remote); > > > > > > > > > > Using devm_drm_of_get_bridge would greatly simplify the driver > > > > > > > > I'm aware of this and this would break the existing sunxi dsi binding, > > > > we are not using ports based pipeline in dsi node. Of-course you have > > > > pointed the same before, please check below > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dri-devel/patch/20210322140152.101709-2... > > > > > > Then drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge needs to be adjusted to handle the DSI > > > bindings and look for a panel or bridge not only through the OF graph, > > > but also on the child nodes > > > > Okay. I need to check this. > > devm_drm_of_get_bridge is not working with legacy binding like the one > used in sun6i dsi
There's nothing legacy about it.
What I'm mean legacy here with current binding used in sun6i-dsi like this.
&dsi { vcc-dsi-supply = <®_dcdc1>; /* VCC-DSI */ status = "okay";
panel@0 { compatible = "bananapi,s070wv20-ct16-icn6211"; reg = <0>; reset-gpios = <&r_pio 0 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /*LCD-RST: PL5 */ enable-gpios = <&pio 1 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* LCD-PWR-EN: PB7 */ backlight = <&backlight>; }; };
Yes, I know, it's the generic DSI binding. It's still not legacy.
devm_drm_of_get_bridge cannot find the device with above binding and able to find the device with below binding.
&dsi { vcc-dsi-supply = <®_dcdc1>; /* VCC-DSI */ status = "okay";
ports { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; dsi_out: port@0 { reg = <0>; dsi_out_bridge: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&bridge_out_dsi>; }; }; }; panel@0 { compatible = "bananapi,s070wv20-ct16-icn6211"; reg = <0>; reset-gpios = <&r_pio 0 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* LCD-RST: PL5 */ enable-gpios = <&pio 1 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* LCD-PWR-EN: PB7 */ backlight = <&backlight>; port { bridge_out_dsi: endpoint { remote-endpoint = <&dsi_out_bridge>; }; }; };};
Yes, I know, and that's because ...
Okay. I will use find panel and bridge separately instead of devm_drm_of_get_bridge in version patches.
That's not been my point, at all?
I mean, that whole discussion has been because you shouldn't do that.
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dri-devel/patch/20211122065223.88059-6-... > > dsi->next_bridge = devm_drm_of_get_bridge(dsi->dev, dsi->dev->of_node, 0, 0); > if (IS_ERR(dsi->next_bridge)) > return PTR_ERR(dsi->next_bridge); > > It is only working if we have ports on the pipeline, something like this > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dri-devel/patch/20210214194102.126146-8... > > Please have a look and let me know if I miss anything?
Yes, you're missing the answer you quoted earlier:
Yes, I'm trying to resolve the comment one after another. Will get back.
... You've ignored that comment.
Not understand which comment you mean. There are few about bridge conversion details, I will send my comments.
The one that got quoted there and you removed. For reference:
Then drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge needs to be adjusted to handle the DSI bindings and look for a panel or bridge not only through the OF graph, but also on the child nodes
devm_drm_of_get_bridge uses drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge under the hood, so of course it won't find it if drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge doesn't. You need to modify drm_of_find_panel_or_bridge to also look for child devices and see if there's a panel or bridge registered for that child node. Then devm_drm_of_get_bridge will work as you intend it to.
Got it now, I will make necessary changes.
Thanks, Jagan.