Re: [PATCH] drm/i2c: tda998x: don't register the connector

From: Brian Starkey
Date: Mon Aug 08 2016 - 12:04:17 EST


Hi,

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 05:08:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:54:06PM +0100, Brian Starkey wrote:
Hi Russell,

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:25:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:55:48AM +0100, Brian Starkey wrote:
> > The connector shouldn't be registered until the rest of the whole device
> > is set up, so that consistent state is presented to userspace.
> >
> > As drm_dev_register() now registers all of the connectors anyway,
> > there's no need to explicitly do it in individual drivers so remove
> > the calls to drm_connector_register()/drm_connector_unregister().
> >
> > This allows componentised drivers to use tda998x without having racy
> > initialisation.
>
> Is there a corresponding patch for armada-drm so that the cubox doesn't
> regress? Has it already been merged?
>

A patch for armada-drm to do what?

I should perhaps have explicitly mentioned that this change depends
on e28cd4d0a223: "drm: Automatically register/unregister all
connectors", which is in drm-next.

Like my commit message says - after the above commit, all connectors
are automatically registered in drm_dev_register() - so I don't
anticipate any regression, but I don't have a cubox to test.

armada-drm seems to be doing effectively the same thing as arm/hdlcd,
which works fine after this patch with no other changes.

Let me know if I've missed something; or if you are able to test on
cubox that would be great.

Ack from my side on generally nuking drm_connector_register() from
everywhere except truely hotplugged connectors like dp mst. It should keep
working for everyone. Only exception is if there's a driver which calls
drm_dev_register too early (before all connectors are probed), which would
be a bug anyway.

Right; the motivation for this change is to fix the init order in
HDLCD and Mali-DP (move drm_dev_register to the end), which we can't
do right now because tda998x expects the DRM device sysfs to be set
up in bind.

@Daniel: Can I take this as your Acked-by?

Should this go in via Russell's tree?

@Russell, are you happy with this change?

Thanks,
Brian

-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch