Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: Move AUX B116XW03 out of panel-edp back to panel-simple

[Anton Bambura]

On 10/5/23 21:10, Doug Anderson wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 7:01 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 1:06 AM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> > <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Il 26/09/23 00:00, Douglas Anderson ha scritto:
> > > > In commit 5f04e7ce392d ("drm/panel-edp: Split eDP panels out of
> > > > panel-simple") I moved a pile of panels out of panel-simple driver
> > > > into the newly created panel-edp driver. One of those panels, however,
> > > > shouldn't have been moved.
> > > >
> > > > As is clear from commit e35e305eff0f ("drm/panel: simple: Add AUO
> > > > B116XW03 panel support"), AUX B116XW03 is an LVDS panel. It's used in
> > > > exynos5250-snow and exynos5420-peach-pit where it's clear that the
> > > > panel is hooked up with LVDS. Furthermore, searching for datasheets I
> > > > found one that makes it clear that this panel is LVDS.
> > > >
> > > > As far as I can tell, I got confused because in commit 88d3457ceb82
> > > > ("drm/panel: auo,b116xw03: fix flash backlight when power on") Jitao
> > > > Shi added "DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_eDP". That seems wrong. Looking at the
> > > > downstream ChromeOS trees, it seems like some Mediatek boards are
> > > > using a panel that they call "auo,b116xw03" that's an eDP panel. The
> > > > best I can guess is that they actually have a different panel that has
> > > > similar timing. If so then the proper panel should be used or they
> > > > should switch to the generic "edp-panel" compatible.
> > > >
> > > > When moving this back to panel-edp, I wasn't sure what to use for
> > > > .bus_flags and .bus_format and whether to add the extra "enable" delay
> > > > from commit 88d3457ceb82 ("drm/panel: auo,b116xw03: fix flash
> > > > backlight when power on"). I've added formats/flags/delays based on my
> > > > (inexpert) analysis of the datasheet. These are untested.
> > > >
> > > > NOTE: if/when this is backported to stable, we might run into some
> > > > trouble. Specifically, before 474c162878ba ("arm64: dts: mt8183:
> > > > jacuzzi: Move panel under aux-bus") this panel was used by
> > > > "mt8183-kukui-jacuzzi", which assumed it was an eDP panel. I don't
> > > > know what to suggest for that other than someone making up a bogus
> > > > panel for jacuzzi that's just for the stable channel.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 88d3457ceb82 ("drm/panel: auo,b116xw03: fix flash backlight when power on")
> > > > Fixes: 5f04e7ce392d ("drm/panel-edp: Split eDP panels out of panel-simple")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > I haven't had a snow or peach-pit hooked up for debugging / testing
> > > > for years. I presume that they must be broken and hope that this fixes
> > > > them.
> > > We could avoid backport breakages by avoiding to backport this to any kernel
> > > that doesn't contain commit 474c162878ba ("arm64: dts: mt8183: jacuzzi: Move
> > > panel under aux-bus")... because creating a dummy panel to get two wrongs
> > > right is definitely not ok.
> > Sure, except that leaves us with ... a breakage. :-P
> >
> > Although I haven't tested it, I have a hard time believing that
> > exynos5250-snow and exynos5420-peach-pit will work properly with the
> > panel defined as an eDP panel. That means that they will be broken. If
> > someone cared to get those fixed in a stable backport then we'd be
> > stuck deciding who to break. If you have any brilliant ideas then I'm
> > all ears.
> >
> > ...then again, I presume this has been broken since commit
> > 88d3457ceb82 ("drm/panel: auo,b116xw03: fix flash backlight when power
> > on"). That was a little over 3 years ago. Maybe I'm wrong and somehow
> > things still limp along and sorta work even though the panel is
> > defined incorrectly?
> I dug out a exynos5250-snow out of my pile and booted postmarket OS on
> it, which was shockingly easy/pleasant (kudos to those involved!). I
> found that it was booting a kernel based on 6.1.24. Digging into
> sysfs, I found that indeed it appeared to be using the "panel-edp"
> driver, so I guess it is limping along with the wrong driver and wrong
> flags...

Hi. I'm the maintainer of chromebooks (including exynos 5 ones) in 
postmarketOS.

We are indeed on 6.1.24 yet, but we will upgrade it to the latest LTS soon.

> It wasn't totally clear for me how to build a new kernel and deploy it
> for postmarket OS, so I wasn't able to confirm this change. I've CCed
> the person listed on the postmarket OS wiki though to see if they have
> any insight.

The recommended way to build kernel is envkernel, see

https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Compiling_kernels_with_envkernel.sh. 
This way you can build kernel, package it and sideload it to your 
device, so it will get installed including updating /lib/modules and 
flashing chrome os kernel partition.

You would need to source envkernel.sh in your kernel tree, place kernel 
config at .output/.config, build it and perform:
pmbootstrap build --envkernel linux-postmarketos-exynos5
pmbootstrap sideload --install-key --host <ip> linux-postmarketos-exynos5

We use lts branch of https://gitlab.com/exynos5-mainline/linux with this 
config:

https://gitlab.com/postmarketOS/pmaports/-/blob/master/device/community/linux-postmarketos-exynos5/config-postmarketos-exynos5.armv7

> In any case, it sounds as if things are working well enough on older
> OSes, so maybe we can just skip trying to do any stable backport on
> this. It still seems like we should land it, though, since the current
> state of the world seems pretty broken. Anyone willing to give a
> Reviewed-by or Acked-by tag?
>
> -Doug
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel