Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] drm/mipi-dsi: Add dev_is_mipi_dsi function

[Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>]

Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> writes:

Hello Maxime,

> This will be especially useful for generic panels (like panel-simple)
> which can take different code path depending on if they are MIPI-DSI
> devices or platform devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c | 3 ++-
>  include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h     | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
> index e5184a0c24651756ee0b1eb27d94083d63eb35a7..21fd647f8ce1a6a862e2f8fb5320e701f26f614f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c
> @@ -89,16 +89,17 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops mipi_dsi_device_pm_ops = {
>  	.thaw = pm_generic_thaw,
>  	.poweroff = pm_generic_poweroff,
>  	.restore = pm_generic_restore,
>  };
>  
> -static const struct bus_type mipi_dsi_bus_type = {
> +const struct bus_type mipi_dsi_bus_type = {
>  	.name = "mipi-dsi",
>  	.match = mipi_dsi_device_match,
>  	.uevent = mipi_dsi_uevent,
>  	.pm = &mipi_dsi_device_pm_ops,
>  };
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mipi_dsi_bus_type);
>  
>  /**
>   * of_find_mipi_dsi_device_by_node() - find the MIPI DSI device matching a
>   *    device tree node
>   * @np: device tree node
> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h b/include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h
> index b37860f4a895c25ef8ba1c5b3f44827ef53aa100..6d2c08e8110151a97620389197f1ef79c058329d 100644
> --- a/include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h
> +++ b/include/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.h
> @@ -221,10 +221,13 @@ struct mipi_dsi_multi_context {
>  
>  #define MIPI_DSI_MODULE_PREFIX "mipi-dsi:"
>  
>  #define to_mipi_dsi_device(__dev)	container_of_const(__dev, struct mipi_dsi_device, dev)
>  
> +extern const struct bus_type mipi_dsi_bus_type;
> +#define dev_is_mipi_dsi(dev)	((dev)->bus == &mipi_dsi_bus_type)
> +

Usually I prefer to have static inline functions instead of macros to have
type checking. I see that this header has a mix of both, so I don't have a
strong opinion on what to use in this case.

Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Core Platforms
Red Hat