From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1A13C25B75 for ; Wed, 15 May 2024 14:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D760010EA2C; Wed, 15 May 2024 14:53:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="qteS1gDj"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from out-179.mta1.migadu.com (out-179.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.179]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FFB210EA28 for ; Wed, 15 May 2024 14:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1715784788; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ji80YrVOn0CdzRUEfTOoKRvKIhm1LRO8qrYRQvN0VUA=; b=qteS1gDjKTwRJ40kT2ZSurGfr/ETwkhm8guWIa6oZqwY7EDyJEr6UzG8W8ZGp3Qumefycs UaCABkvUzDSq3qQ1DQY1eg6yYRJAsrg7GtTEK3HhglmI19LgDsYeiytemH6wwFB/uDIhVu 5/mw5uxLSUMwe+JNYEdxDiVR5NwoTxk= Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 22:53:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] drm/bridge: Add 'struct device *' field to the drm_bridge structure To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Neil Armstrong , Dmitry Baryshkov , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240514154045.309925-1-sui.jingfeng@linux.dev> <20240514-scarlet-corgi-of-efficiency-faf2bb@penduick> <20240515-fair-satisfied-myna-480dea@penduick> Content-Language: en-US, en-AU X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Sui Jingfeng In-Reply-To: <20240515-fair-satisfied-myna-480dea@penduick> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-BeenThere: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Direct Rendering Infrastructure - Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" Hi, On 5/15/24 22:30, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 12:53:33AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 2024/5/15 00:22, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:40:43PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote: >>>> Because a lot of implementations has already added it into their drived >>>> class, promote it into drm_bridge core may benifits a lot. drm bridge is >>>> a driver, it should know the underlying hardware entity. >>> Is there some actual benefits, or is it theoretical at this point? >> >> >> I think, DRM bridge drivers could remove the 'struct device *dev' >> member from their derived structure. Rely on the drm bridge core >> when they need the 'struct device *' pointer. > > Sure, but why do we need to do so? > > The other thread you had with Jani points out that it turns out that > things are more complicated than "every bridge driver has a struct > device anyway", it creates inconsistency in the API (bridges would have > a struct device, but not other entities), and it looks like there's no > use for it anyway. > > None of these things are deal-breaker by themselves, but if there's only > downsides and no upside, it's not clear to me why we should do it at all. > It can reduce boilerplate. > Maxime -- Best regards Sui