From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from galahad.ideasonboard.com ([185.26.127.97]:33686 "EHLO galahad.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S968329AbdADPNw (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jan 2017 10:13:52 -0500 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Laurent Pinchart , dri-devel , "open list:DRM DRIVERS FOR RENESAS" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] drm: bridge: Add LVDS encoder driver Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:13:23 +0200 Message-ID: <7936513.8Ot9e1G3ck@avalon> In-Reply-To: <20170104145824.bnjdsv77bay75ie2@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <1480410283-28698-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <2223998.87cnrdv6Vi@avalon> <20170104145824.bnjdsv77bay75ie2@phenom.ffwll.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-renesas-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Daniel, On Wednesday 04 Jan 2017 15:58:25 Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 04:33:57PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 Jan 2017 14:51:48 Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> Hm, something like drm_bridge_panel_bridge_init(dev, panel) should be > >> enough, or not? My idea is to use this for the case where the only > >> thing in dt is the panel, with no real bridge chip. And I think we > >> don't need anything beyond that one _init function, plus maybe some > >> additional paramaters ... > > > > There should be no bridge then. If you want the DRM core to manage panels > > automatically, then we should create specific helpers for that, not abuse > > the bridge infrastructure. Bridges should be instantiated from a hardware > > device and bound to drivers as usual. > > I guess that's the part where I disagree: Just because there's physically > no bridge doesn't mean we shouldn't just treat it as one in the software > abstraction. If it looks and acts like a bridge (even an empty one), then > imo it can be a bridge. > > If you insist on panels being panels, then I guess we need some other kind > of glue to bind them into arbitrary bridge chains. But given that the > callbacks match very closely, I don't see the point. > > In an idea world a panel would probably derive from a drm_bridge, but > we're not in that universe unfortunately ;-) Or both would derive from another object, but I agree that's how it should work. That's what I want to achieve, one step at a time. Creating dummy bridges isn't a step in that direction in my opinion, so I'd rather not do that, but work towards the right abstraction. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart