Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] drm/panel: Remove most store/double-check of prepared/enabled state

[Linus Walleij]

On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 11:07 PM Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> As talked about in commit d2aacaf07395 ("drm/panel: Check for already
> prepared/enabled in drm_panel"), we want to remove needless code from
> panel drivers that was storing and double-checking the
> prepared/enabled state. Even if someone was relying on the
> double-check before, that double-check is now in the core and not
> needed in individual drivers.
>
> This series attempts to do just that. While the original grep, AKA:
>   git grep 'if.*>prepared' -- drivers/gpu/drm/panel
>   git grep 'if.*>enabled' -- drivers/gpu/drm/panel
> ...still produces a few hits after my series, they are _mostly_ all
> gone. The ones that are left are less trivial to fix.
>
> One of the main reasons that many panels probably needed to store and
> double-check their prepared/enabled appears to have been to handle
> shutdown and/or remove. Panels drivers often wanted to force the power
> off for panels in these cases and this was a good reason for the
> double-check. As part of this series a new helper is added that uses
> the state tracking that the drm_panel core is doing so each individual
> panel driver doesn't need to do it.
>
> This series changes a lot of drivers and obviously the author can't
> test on all of them. The changes here are also not completely trivial
> in all cases. Please double-check your drivers carefully to make sure
> something wasn't missed. After looking at over 40 drivers I'll admit
> that my eyes glazed over a little.
>
> I've attempted to organize these patches like to group together panels
> that needed similar handling. Panels that had code that didn't seem to
> match anyone else got their own patch. I made judgement calls on what
> I considered "similar".
>
> As noted in individual patches, there are some cases here where I
> expect behavior to change a little bit. I'm hoping these changes are
> for the better and don't cause any problems. Fingers crossed.
>
> I have at least confirmed that "allmodconfig" for arm64 doesn't fall
> on its face with this series. I haven't done a ton of other testing.

The series:
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>

Please send out a non-RFC version, this is clearly the right thing to
do.

Yours,
Linus Walleij