On 02/23/16 17:32, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
On 23/02/16 17:26, Jyri Sarha wrote:
You didn't comment on why this is not an error? Why should the driver continue even if crtc->port is missing?
At least for the time being if the drm_of_find_possible_crtcs() fails the tda998x driver assumes the first crtc with a warning. So for that part everything will work just fine still.
Then it is another question how priv->is_componentized could be set and probing has gotten this far while there is no port node to be found. The WARN_ON() should really never happen as long as the code is the way it currently is.
Ok. But I think it's either ok to not have crtc->port, and in that case no print is needed, or it's not ok, and it's better to print an error and fail.
Now it's kind of vague: the driver continues without crtc->port, but gives a scary WARN.
The scary WARN is not for not having crtc->port initialized, but for breached internal sanity when a componentized probe has somehow reached this point without a port node to be found.