From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout-04.galae.net (smtpout-04.galae.net [185.171.202.116]) (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 42BBC3F7AB2; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:11:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.171.202.116 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782490323; cv=none; b=HFWL/Wrefp6dSrPc8lGvFwrMoIQeEqcOK1sR1CMxJAsNxaCUTcMyYKess/rLPTtC3T64nie6Msm+1LoDuhJvsfi8/d648PHRb5nuNIqYRRFpot5KMfzHtmgwtyVeHilzDgWxYg231GOxtB0jnrMyEDHHbKfs1GLHFhkQ//JZrvM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782490323; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5YRniym/2tbxtuJ/K7G4NyD6iKvP4Rntx9BGCG6QVCc=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=iHzoNQCzIZyc1iImBx2a9tQmPwxybIOeL+4nAAK3g0AvD8GzPOQuBM6vv873cB+FrceC/I2xHTbI5C4zk5rqh/hZm7J2JsC8YQ3NIHbBJB9JN8Sp3YFOBcZukN++pdX+Uds1Qayalj16S9mrg+RXwXQAmVQbprUsNtOKBpuupTA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=C/NUSohY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.171.202.116 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="C/NUSohY" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-04.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F3E6C5CD68; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:12:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 465EB60232; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:11:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 1D56E104C98AB; Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:11:47 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1782490314; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=2aMpjqPpJ3jB+9a9ya7QqmAO5GA2YL86oNP/6GMR7AA=; b=C/NUSohY5vtGaRJld8ZdfDxYs5JmRhsZfHf2sMEvr+zI2ISREqyOFDdPUzfAlNDNSkmwjv m4MDWVI6r3d8tyl53THMcnLJBvOgU4C46LVuZAh5GvlJ++5QTILp9oIzONPtQBdVUeKdX5 8iyisAOJwjmUNtOX9ubsQ/aiTmiZUkrBrwhxwzbsHFvTK5UI9J/s1ITN+vayybv0HyFW/l 9zK2ebMFYtf7OWlPohfx2BGrQAdkK5Th7Y+LhdsUDTatQpo9D/rQFfgHkxJgAmTAql6iFM sPuvdkbNEz8O2TklPCFL7VZQhhTaBdkIqo2cUDzyP2p6a2jDXW4AkDMmsXGrYg== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:11:46 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] drm-bridge: lontium lt9611c: fixes and improvements Cc: "Andrzej Hajda" , "Neil Armstrong" , "Robert Foss" , "Laurent Pinchart" , "Jonas Karlman" , "Jernej Skrabec" , "David Airlie" , "Simona Vetter" , "Maarten Lankhorst" , "Maxime Ripard" , "Thomas Zimmermann" , "Rob Herring" , "Krzysztof Kozlowski" , "Conor Dooley" , "Vinod Koul" , , , , , To: "Mohit Dsor" , "Luca Ceresoli" From: "Luca Ceresoli" X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20260611-lt9611-b4-send-v1-0-42abbcd3bb1e@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260611-lt9611-b4-send-v1-3-42abbcd3bb1e@oss.qualcomm.com> In-Reply-To: X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 Hello Mohit, On Mon Jun 22, 2026 at 2:08 PM CEST, Mohit Dsor wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 11:26:34AM +0200, Luca Ceresoli wrote: >> On Wed Jun 10, 2026 at 11:14 PM CEST, Mohit Dsor wrote: >> > Remove two redundant lt9611c_reset() calls: >> > >> > 1. In lt9611c_bridge_atomic_pre_enable(): a reset is already performed >> > during probe and resume; calling it again on every display enable >> > adds ~440ms of unnecessary latency. >> > >> > 2. At the end of lt9611c_probe(): a reset was already performed earlie= r >> > in probe before lt9611c_lock(). The second reset is redundant. >> > >> > Also, the DRM HDMI bridge framework requires hdmi_write_hdmi_infoframe= and >> > hdmi_clear_hdmi_infoframe callbacks for HDMI vendor-specific infoframe >> > (VSI) support, used for features such as HDR metadata signalling. >> > >> > This patch add stub implementations that return success. Wire them int= o the bridge >> > function table. >> > >> > Also, Store the chip variant enum value in the of_match_table .data fi= eld and >> > retrieve it via of_device_get_match_data() when probing from a DT node= . >> > Fall back to i2c_device_id.driver_data for non-DT (e.g. ACPI) probe >> > paths. >> > >> > This is the standard kernel pattern for passing per-compatible data >> > through the OF match table, and avoids relying solely on the I2C devic= e >> > ID table for chip type detection when DT is available. >> > >> > Populate bridge.vendor and bridge.product so the DRM HDMI framework ca= n >> > report the correct manufacturer and product name in the HDMI connector >> > properties (visible via xrandr --prop and related sysfs entries). >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Mohit Dsor >> >> These are several unrelated changes and should be separate commits. >> >> Luca >> >> -- >> Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin >> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering >> https://bootlin.com > > Hi Luca, > Thanks for the review. > I see your point about separation, but in this case I intended this as a = single cohesive update to the driver rather than unrelated changes. > > The redundant lt9611c_reset() removals are cleanup to avoid unnecessary l= atency during enable/probe. > The HDMI VSI infoframe callbacks are required to align with the DRM HDMI = bridge framework expectations. > The OF match data change ensures correct chip variant detection when prob= ing via DT. > The bridge vendor/product population improves user-visible HDMI connector= reporting. This a list of 4 things your patch does, and they seem fairly independent from each other. That's a hint that they should probably be 4 patches. If each is small, no problem. An additional, pragmatic reason to split: if there's a bug in one of your patches, it can be easily bisected and the problematic patch be reverted without removing the other 3 patches. Luca -- Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com