Re: [PATCH] drm: bridge: ldb: add support for using channel 1 only

[Marek Vasut]

On 4/5/23 09:30, Luca Ceresoli wrote:

[...]

> > > @@ -311,10 +314,23 @@ static int fsl_ldb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >    	if (IS_ERR(fsl_ldb->regmap))
> > >    		return PTR_ERR(fsl_ldb->regmap);
> > >    
> > > -	/* Locate the panel DT node. */
> > > -	panel_node = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, 0);
> > > -	if (!panel_node)
> > > -		return -ENXIO;
> > > +	/* Locate the remote ports and the panel node */
> > > +	remote1 = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 1, 0);
> > > +	remote2 = of_graph_get_remote_node(dev->of_node, 2, 0);
> > > +	fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled = (remote1 != NULL);
> > > +	fsl_ldb->ch1_enabled = (remote2 != NULL);
> > > +	panel_node = of_node_get(remote1 ? remote1 : remote2);
> >
> > You can even do this without the middle 'remote1' I think:
> >
> > panel_node = of_node_get(remote1 ? : remote2);
>
> Apparently, but honestly with such short expressions clearly having no
> side effects I think it's not helping readability.

I think even the ternary operator itself isn't helpful much, but that's 
a matter of taste, and I don't have a better suggestion which would 
improve the readability either (I tried to expand it into if()... but 
that looks bad too).

No need to change anything.

[...]

Thanks for the patch.