Hi Heiko, Do you think someone can have a try of this patchset on a RK SoC ?
Thanks, Neil On 01/07/2020 08:35, Adrian Ratiu wrote: > Hi Neil, > > On Mon, 29 Jun 2020, Neil Armstrong <narmstr...@baylibre.com> wrote: >> Hi Adrian, >> On 09/06/2020 19:49, Adrian Ratiu wrote: >>> [Re-submitting to cc dri-devel, sorry about the noise] Hello all, v9 >>> cleanly applies on top of latest next-20200609 tree. v9 does not depend on >>> other patches as the last binding doc has been merged. All feedback up to >>> this point has been addressed. Specific details in individual patch >>> changelogs. The biggest changes are the deprecation of the Synopsys DW >>> bridge bind() API in favor of of_drm_find_bridge() and .attach callbacks, >>> the addition of a TODO entry which outlines future planned bridge driver >>> refactorings and a reordering of some i.MX 6 patches to appease checkpatch. >>> The idea behind the TODO is to get this regmap and i.MX 6 driver merged >>> and then do the rest of refactorings in-tree because it's easier and the >>> refactorings themselves are out-of-scope of this series which is adding >>> i.MX 6 support and is quite big already, so please, if there are more >>> refactoring ideas, let's add them to the TODO doc. :) I intend to tackle >>> those after this series is merged to >>> avoid two complex inter-dependent simultaneous series. >> >> This has been around here for a long time and you seem to have addressed all >> the reviews. >>> As always more testing is welcome especially on Rockchip and STM SoCs. >> >> It has been tested on STM, but I'd like a feedback on RK platform before >> applying the bridge parts. >> Can the imx & stm patches be applied separately ? > > Yes the IMX and STM patches can be applied separately, they just both depend > on the common regmap patches. > > The binding API removal change which directly touches RK can also be applied > separately, but unfortunately I do not have access to a RK board with a DSI > display to test it (or the bridge regmap logic on RK btw...), I just > "eye-balled" the RK code based on the public docs and it LGTM. > >> Neil >> >>> >>> Big thank you to everyone who has contributed to this up to now, >>> Adrian >>> >>> Adrian Ratiu (11): >>> drm: bridge: dw_mipi_dsi: add initial regmap infrastructure >>> drm: bridge: dw_mipi_dsi: abstract register access using reg_fields >>> drm: bridge: dw_mipi_dsi: add dsi v1.01 support >>> drm: bridge: dw_mipi_dsi: remove bind/unbind API >>> dt-bindings: display: add i.MX6 MIPI DSI host controller doc >>> ARM: dts: imx6qdl: add missing mipi dsi properties >>> drm: imx: Add i.MX 6 MIPI DSI host platform driver >>> drm: stm: dw-mipi-dsi: let the bridge handle the HW version check >>> drm: bridge: dw-mipi-dsi: split low power cfg register into fields >>> drm: bridge: dw-mipi-dsi: fix bad register field offsets >>> Documentation: gpu: todo: Add dw-mipi-dsi consolidation plan >>> >>> .../display/imx/fsl,mipi-dsi-imx6.yaml | 112 +++ >>> Documentation/gpu/todo.rst | 25 + >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl.dtsi | 8 + >>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/Kconfig | 1 + >>> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c | 713 ++++++++++++------ >>> drivers/gpu/drm/imx/Kconfig | 8 + >>> drivers/gpu/drm/imx/Makefile | 1 + >>> drivers/gpu/drm/imx/dw_mipi_dsi-imx6.c | 399 ++++++++++ >>> .../gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c | 7 +- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/stm/dw_mipi_dsi-stm.c | 16 +- >>> 10 files changed, 1059 insertions(+), 231 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/imx/fsl,mipi-dsi-imx6.yaml >>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/imx/dw_mipi_dsi-imx6.c >>> _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel