Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] usb: typec: qcom-pmic-typec: enable DP support

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 01:19:36PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 13:14, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/28/23 03:08, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > To enable DisplayPort on the platforms supported by qcom-pmic-typec
> > > driver, we need to register a corresponding drm_bridge for this device
> > > to be able to receive the OOB hotplug event sent to the corresponding
> > > DRM connector.
> > >
> > > Reception of the hotplug event is implemented by [1], but there is no
> > > direct dependency on that patchset. This series implements the remaining
> > > parts: registration of the drm_bridge and setting of the proper
> > > destination for the OOB hotplug event.
> > >
> > > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/120393/
> > >
> > > Changes since v2:
> > > - Reworded commit message for the first patch to explicitly mention that
> > >    the "displayport" OF property was rejected (Bjorn)
> > > - Removed several #ifdefs from the qcom-pmic-typec patch (Bryan, Konrad,
> > >    Greg K-H)
> > >
> > > Changes since v1:
> > > - Properly handle CONFIG_DRM dependency. Disallow building DRM as a
> > >    module if qcom-pmic-typec driver is built-in (Bryan).
> >
> >   config TYPEC_QCOM_PMIC
> >         tristate "Qualcomm PMIC USB Type-C Port Controller Manager driver"
> >         depends on ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST
> > +       depends on DRM || DRM=n
> >
> > This disallows building TYPEC_QCOM_PMIC into the kernel if DRM is built
> > as module, which is pretty much the opposite of what is claimed above.
> > It does not affect DRM at all.
> >
> > Not that it matters much, but I find it confusing if the change log
> > claims to do the opposite of what the code is doing.
> 
> Ack. If there is a v4 I'll fix the changelog to invert the condition.

Please fix.

thanks,

greg k-h