Re: [PATCH v2] drm/arcpgu: Accommodate adv7511 switch to DRM bridge

[Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>]

Hi Daniel, David,

On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 18:33 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-snps-arc [mailto:linux-snps-arc-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Alexey Brodkin
> > Sent: 19 октября 2016 г. 12:33
> > To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; architt@codeaurora.org; Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com
> > Cc: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/arcpgu: Accommodate adv7511 switch to DRM bridge
> > 
> > Hi Archit, all,
> > 
> > On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 14:43 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 10/19/2016 01:16 PM, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ARC PGU driver starts crashing on initialization after
> > > > 'commit e12c2f645557 ("drm/i2c: adv7511: Convert to drm_bridge")'
> > > > This happenes because in "arcpgu_drm_hdmi_init" function we get pointer
> > > > of "drm_i2c_encoder_driver" structure, which doesn't exist after
> > > > adv7511 hdmi encoder interface changed from slave encoder to drm bridge.
> > > > So, when we call "encoder_init" function from this structure driver
> > > > crashes.
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > 
> > > Looks good now.
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Archit Taneja <architt@codeaurora.org>
> > 
> > And IMHO it would be really good to get this one back-ported to 4.8
> > because it really fixes kernel crash if ARC PGU driver is used.
> > 
> > It might be a bit of a problem because patch itself a little-bit larger
> > than formal requirement for stable backports but let's see if it gets accepted.
> 
> Could you please pick this one up?
> I may alternatively send a pull-request to David but not sure if 1 patch worth it.
> 
> Also if that's not really too late it would be good to get this one in 4.9 since the patch
> In question fixes a real driver crash on its instantiation.
> Actually driver crash happens since 4.8 but I failed to notice it earlier and given amount
> of changes I think there's barely a chance for it it to be accepted in stable branches...
> which in its turn makes at least 4.9 very desirable.

Any chance this one gets accepted anytime soon?

Regards,
Alexey