Hi Nikhil,
Thank you for the patch.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 09:31:29PM +0530, Nikhil Devshatwar wrote:
bus_flags can be specified by a bridge in the timings. If the bridge provides it, Override the bus_flags when propagating from next bridge.
Signed-off-by: Nikhil Devshatwar nikhil.nd@ti.com Reviewed-by: Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkeinen@ti.com
Notes: changes from v2: * update comment changes from v1: * Check for timings * Prioritize timings flags over next bridge's flags
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c index 64f0effb52ac..13b67fc0dad3 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_bridge.c @@ -975,6 +975,14 @@ drm_atomic_bridge_propagate_bus_flags(struct drm_bridge *bridge, * duplicate the "dummy propagation" logic. */ bridge_state->input_bus_cfg.flags = output_flags;
- /*
* If legacy bus flags are provided in bridge->timings, use those as* input flags instead of propagating the output flags.*/- if (bridge->timings && bridge->timings->input_bus_flags)
bridge_state->input_bus_cfg.flags =bridge->timings->input_bus_flags;
Hasn't Boris commented in his review of v1 that bus flags should be set in atomic_check, even when they're static ? We're moving towards removing timings->input_bus_flags, so this patch goes in the wrong direction :-S
}
/**