Re: [PATCH v10 11/18] drm/bridge: analogix_dp: Apply drm_bridge_connector helper

[Damon Ding <damon.ding@rock-chips.com>]

Hi Luca,

On 3/14/2026 1:10 AM, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> Hello Damon,
> 
> On Tue Mar 10, 2026 at 2:24 AM CET, Damon Ding wrote:
>> Initialize bridge_connector for both Rockchip and Exynos encoder sides.
>> Then, make DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR mandatory for Analogix bridge
>> side, as the private &drm_connector is no longer created.
>>
>> The previous &drm_connector_funcs and &drm_connector_helper_funcs APIs
>> are replaced by the corresponding &drm_bridge_funcs APIs:
>>
>> analogix_dp_atomic_check() -> analogix_dp_bridge_atomic_check()
>> analogix_dp_detect()       -> analogix_dp_bridge_detect()
>> analogix_dp_get_modes()    -> analogix_dp_bridge_get_modes()
>>                                analogix_dp_bridge_edid_read()
>>
>> Additionally, the compatibilities of Analogix DP bridge based on whether
>> the next bridge is a 'panel'. If it is, OP_MODES and OP_DETECT are
>> supported; If not (the next bridge is a 'monitor' or a bridge chip),
>> OP_EDID and OP_DETECT are supported.
>>
>> The devm_drm_bridge_add() is placed in analogix_dp_bind() instead of
>> analogix_dp_probe(), because the type of next bridge (the panel, monitor
>> or bridge chip) can only be determined after the probe process has fully
>> completed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Damon Ding <damon.ding@rock-chips.com>
>> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
>> Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> (on rk3588)
> 
> ...
> 
>> @@ -73,15 +72,12 @@ static int exynos_dp_bridge_attach(struct analogix_dp_plat_data *plat_data,
>>   				   struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>>   {
>>   	struct exynos_dp_device *dp = to_dp(plat_data);
>> -	enum drm_bridge_attach_flags flags = 0;
>>   	int ret;
>>
>>   	/* Pre-empt DP connector creation if there's a bridge */
>>   	if (plat_data->next_bridge) {
>> -		if (dp->has_of_bridge)
>> -			flags = DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR;
>> -
>> -		ret = drm_bridge_attach(&dp->encoder, plat_data->next_bridge, bridge, flags);
>> +		ret = drm_bridge_attach(&dp->encoder, plat_data->next_bridge, bridge,
>> +					DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR);
> 
> Should this be 'flags | DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR' to be future-proof?
> 

Aha, the exynos_dp_bridge_attach() and even 
&analogix_dp_plat_data.attach() have been removed in [PATCH v10 16/18] 
for consistency and simplification. Since the only bridge flag supported 
right now is DRM_BRIDGE_ATTACH_NO_CONNECTOR, let’s leave this as is for 
now. ;-)

Best regards,
Damon