From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5391FC2D0BF for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217AB2465A for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="RZu/Wv0m" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726141AbfLMI1s (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 03:27:48 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com ([209.85.128.68]:51226 "EHLO mail-wm1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725793AbfLMI1r (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 03:27:47 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id d73so5331072wmd.1 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:27:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=JwuoHfqD4FyIs4KF1Ipmu8G5TBEwPS2a5x2rk/31xck=; b=RZu/Wv0m4HqQgb7kZHHwyZiV72yCDHClDTjqRYig6G327C22KOVE23Gl4QlWIk4J9g /mTwG/EcWHHf9sYXXpPtTpllj8NvhWZ9k5SsV4jgWzE2uqeHWssPggXoaT2gjyI8wre+ VqxL2RAU5YTssHRWil1Gz4l8a8O18PLMhlz0Fd0EfGvTrga/wRtXo8/VzsNwEzcaJc2o kCgWLQL7844S7BROBTksqLxNyH5Y12iS0O9bHQi+v4QV3BqAKqGVjvm8V1yufjNHj3vI SyFI8XHa40wO7C8ZTiULcUMVsX8duH9Oq530Z+8L5UrJXOxugLt6sFTO3yrlOsl2a4f/ pvOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=JwuoHfqD4FyIs4KF1Ipmu8G5TBEwPS2a5x2rk/31xck=; b=hug8WZSBSHf1qnJqhuMTGkV7z66zmbTWq9KiEe/Yrh1QYF1zS5jqJxb4c7Pw+Izq9E VggOZNkwunkLTN7NqvJTkY631s2c9sdfbutV+OCkyJBY9xqbBXPUiesVxLjDzThhCa7m DiJVlRxPAdGXNj8nhWN1VkkTwX4TDG15Iu8Hcc6Ghjrq8awCga5atN0opjlKGRZSczIY ugIo38WvqhHhIzrHoNsIDxYgUtBVNCKRoRPdOMIN1KpIZEBFxQK6bHJUKpXPbACg1n/m 1G3N5LMj9R5e9ghsyxYGBUKSJ4IwoPfaKwY+TQFo7QMqbJVVHTanoDrn6bvx94AFfEuY Ygzw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUQk+ZtqolXzvwPvNpiJPYyxC67rpoxLu0vBv414sobvjUvP2yC DdQSphd3l3G2peu6GnqMtlP1I5DQIeI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw9NFR6SJCU7qpurkLNw/ZkJfL008Kue/7hzmCvNYuR/i+XEHjDwK63wFSkZZdj2Cmg0QgOSw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7918:: with SMTP id l24mr12505169wme.125.1576225664505; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:27:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from dell ([95.149.164.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a133sm225770wme.29.2019.12.13.00.27.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:27:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:27:34 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Hans de Goede Cc: Maarten Lankhorst , Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , Rodrigo Vivi , Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Andy Shevchenko , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mfd: intel_soc_pmic: Rename pwm_backlight pwm-lookup to pwm_pmic_backlight Message-ID: <20191213082734.GE3468@dell> References: <20191119151818.67531-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20191119151818.67531-3-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20191210085111.GQ3468@dell> <20191212084546.GA3468@dell> <20191212155209.GC3468@dell> <4d07445d-98b1-f23c-0aac-07709b45df78@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4d07445d-98b1-f23c-0aac-07709b45df78@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 12 Dec 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 12-12-2019 16:52, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 12-12-2019 09:45, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Lee, > > > > > > > > > > On 10-12-2019 09:51, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > At least Bay Trail (BYT) and Cherry Trail (CHT) devices can use 1 of 2 > > > > > > > different PWM controllers for controlling the LCD's backlight brightness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either the one integrated into the PMIC or the one integrated into the > > > > > > > SoC (the 1st LPSS PWM controller). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So far in the LPSS code on BYT we have skipped registering the LPSS PWM > > > > > > > controller "pwm_backlight" lookup entry when a Crystal Cove PMIC is > > > > > > > present, assuming that in this case the PMIC PWM controller will be used. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On CHT we have been relying on only 1 of the 2 PWM controllers being > > > > > > > enabled in the DSDT at the same time; and always registered the lookup. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So far this has been working, but the correct way to determine which PWM > > > > > > > controller needs to be used is by checking a bit in the VBT table and > > > > > > > recently I've learned about 2 different BYT devices: > > > > > > > Point of View MOBII TAB-P800W > > > > > > > Acer Switch 10 SW5-012 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which use a Crystal Cove PMIC, yet the LCD is connected to the SoC/LPSS > > > > > > > PWM controller (and the VBT correctly indicates this), so here our old > > > > > > > heuristics fail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since only the i915 driver has access to the VBT, this commit renames > > > > > > > the "pwm_backlight" lookup entries for the Crystal Cove PMIC's PWM > > > > > > > controller to "pwm_pmic_backlight" so that the i915 driver can do a > > > > > > > pwm_get() for the right controller depending on the VBT bit, instead of > > > > > > > the i915 driver relying on a "pwm_backlight" lookup getting registered > > > > > > > which magically points to the right controller. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_core.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > For my own reference: > > > > > > Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones > > > > > > > > > > As mentioned in the cover-letter, to avoid breaking bi-sectability > > > > > as well as to avoid breaking the intel-gfx CI we need to merge this series > > > > > in one go through one tree. Specifically through the drm-intel tree. > > > > > Is that ok with you ? > > > > > > > > > > If this is ok with you, then you do not have to do anything, I will just push > > > > > the entire series to drm-intel. drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_core.c > > > > > does not see much changes so I do not expect this to lead to any conflicts. > > > > > > > > It's fine, so long as a minimal immutable pull-request is provided. > > > > Whether it's pulled or not will depend on a number of factors, but it > > > > needs to be an option. > > > > > > The way the drm subsys works that is not really a readily available > > > option. The struct definition which this patch changes a single line in > > > has not been touched since 2015-06-26 so I really doubt we will get a > > > conflict from this. > > > > Always with the exceptions ... > > > > OOI, why does this *have* to go through the DRM tree? > > This patch renames the name used to lookup the pwm controller from > "pwm_backlight" to "pwm_pmic_backlight" because there are 2 possible > pwm controllers which may be used, one in the SoC itself and one > in the PMIC. Which controller should be used is described in a table > in the Video BIOS, so another part of this series adds this code to > the i915 driver: > > - panel->backlight.pwm = pwm_get(dev->dev, "pwm_backlight"); > + /* Get the right PWM chip for DSI backlight according to VBT */ > + if (dev_priv->vbt.dsi.config->pwm_blc == PPS_BLC_PMIC) { > + panel->backlight.pwm = pwm_get(dev->dev, "pwm_pmic_backlight"); > + desc = "PMIC"; > + } else { > + panel->backlight.pwm = pwm_get(dev->dev, "pwm_soc_backlight"); > + desc = "SoC"; > + } > > So both not to break bisectability, but also so as to not break the extensive > CI system which is used to test the i915 driver we need the MFD change doing > the rename to go upstrream through the same tree as the i915 change. > > I have even considered just squashing the 2 commits together as having only 1 > present, but not the other breaks stuff left and right. That doesn't answer the question. Why do they all *have* to go in via the DRM tree specifically? -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog