Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] drm/bridge: add list of removed refcounted bridges

[Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>]

Hi Maxime,

On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:15:30 +0200
Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> wrote:

> > @@ -197,15 +197,22 @@
> >   * driver.
> >   */
> >  
> > +/* Protect bridge_list and bridge_removed_list */
> >  static DEFINE_MUTEX(bridge_lock);
> >  static LIST_HEAD(bridge_list);
> > +static LIST_HEAD(bridge_removed_list);  
> 
> I'm not super fond of "removed" here, it's ambiguous, especially since
> the bridge wouldn't be considered as removed after the last put.
> 
> lingering maybe?

Sure, will rename.

> > @@ -288,10 +296,13 @@ void *__devm_drm_bridge_alloc(struct device *dev, size_t size, size_t offset,
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__devm_drm_bridge_alloc);
> >  
> >  /**
> > - * drm_bridge_add - add the given bridge to the global bridge list
> > + * drm_bridge_add - publish a bridge
> >   *
> >   * @bridge: bridge control structure
> >   *
> > + * Add the given bridge to the global list of "published" bridges, where
> > + * they can be found by users via of_drm_find_bridge().  
> 
> It's quite a change in semantics, at least in the doc. I believe it
> should be a separate patch, since it's really more about updating the
> drm_bridge_add / drm_bridge_remove doc than collecting the
> removed-but-not-freed bridges.
> 
> Also, I'm not sure if it's more obvious here. The quotes around publish
> kind of it to that too. Maybe using register / registration would make
> it more obvious?

OK, I'll reword using register/registration and definitely move to a
separate patch.

Thanks for reviewing.

Luca

-- 
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com