From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB4A7172BA6; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721049037; cv=none; b=ivnE6DXnIVWnPsF8BpTMKwT+vdNfbKBkadxz1D7iDOWn5ldVOg4snEUsuVxgvajyL3c3f08M+5xYLvVJgMGsFQWF4rbKwB8xDtKj4geT/Ab3QPynp6qgVozvd4KMfK9GRQelnfVkuCGcceDctULZjWJvHX24nIVNKxDRLPOQF10= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721049037; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oZ7yq0qh7vuJ0B7mSghU33Yp+qarQERf6HfWn5bKrl4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=tljW+RRma2ZqSCXh+7EE+Ll5GY3GDnxq6dqVhNgNP65vgdNRO/+Px/4H9uLfzMH2chClvWcbr/m4rtctaxga6qZgjeigIO8Mzg0ONljwb42s/MEyB1yYJpxtu/6mKs9TTGMfvyPdRvoJv9f0D8nakex0PdTUD6KJOD8LppBl1/M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=F5g220E2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="F5g220E2" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37555C32782; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:10:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1721049037; bh=oZ7yq0qh7vuJ0B7mSghU33Yp+qarQERf6HfWn5bKrl4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F5g220E2tY/zMdt2XZGDCjRSpBFRfMuqu/8qXp/uJMyGhkhURLOwn3MaYaqS+hstK ToPZBiUQrwGyPrSEpGy0Jb+4N9u/KUdLRfUYKizJPxsUScXsgivodER7liFIMnojiY jEjK5qZCpssP9aOboi4666Cs/nmdVSSygwGuRRowAxv7wSg2KG1O+GnzSjNHKouZWL lDo5KFa270CCyxXcGYLTsh7+u1KuYXp8npW4cQhY3iQ0YflM/CVWiAxh/IeZMpvMi9 0wzcEFlDYbYzkynKdSLAmStD1MzjZceJsR/kXNApHtk4Ow01JXj8fmvTVaik1C2KX3 vsOMNPrNDfsnQ== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1sTLTP-000000001Hm-1sax; Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:10:35 +0200 Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:10:35 +0200 From: Johan Hovold To: Stephan Gerhold Cc: Neil Armstrong , Bjorn Andersson , Konrad Dybcio , Jessica Zhang , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Douglas Anderson , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Abel Vesa Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Revert "drm/panel-edp: Add SDC ATNA45AF01" Message-ID: References: <20240715-x1e80100-crd-backlight-v2-0-31b7f2f658a3@linaro.org> <20240715-x1e80100-crd-backlight-v2-2-31b7f2f658a3@linaro.org> <7daa3c0d-cecf-4f50-be32-ae116b920db0@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:54:59PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:42:12PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > How will we handle current/old crd DT with new kernels ? > > I think this is answered in the commit message: > > > > We have existing users of this panel through the generic "edp-panel" > > > compatible (e.g. the Qualcomm X1E80100 CRD), but the screen works only > > > partially in that configuration: It works after boot but once the screen > > > gets disabled it does not turn on again until after reboot. It behaves the > > > same way with the default "conservative" timings, so we might as well drop > > > the configuration from the panel-edp driver. That way, users with old DTBs > > > will get a warning and can move to the new driver. > > Basically with the entry removed, the panel-edp driver will fallback to > default "conservative" timings when using old DTBs. There will be a > warning in dmesg, but otherwise the panel will somewhat work just as > before. I think this is a good way to remind users to upgrade. > > > Same question for patch 3, thie serie introduces a bindings that won't be valid > > if we backport patch 3. I don't think patch should be backported, and this patch > > should be dropped. > > There would be a dtbs_check warning, yeah. Functionally, it would work > just fine. Is that reason enough to keep display partially broken for > 6.11? We could also apply the minor binding change for 6.11 if needed. > > I'm also fine if this just goes into 6.12 though. No, we should definitely fix this for 6.11. This machine is not very useable without it. Whether to backport is a separate question, but note that patch 3 is not even marked for backport currently. Fixing the backlight at the cost of a dtb checker warning should not be an issue, but backporting would break existing setups unless people have the new panel driver enabled and this may be a valid concern. On the other hand, support for this platform is in a bit of flux already and it looks like most fixes aren't even tagged for stable (presumably for that reason). Johan