Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2026, 03:13:25 Mitteleuropäische Sommerzeit schrieb Chaoyi
Chen:
> Hello Heikki,
>
> On 5/19/2026 9:43 PM, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 05:41:43PM +0800, Chaoyi Chen wrote:
> >> From: Chaoyi Chen <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> This series focuses on adding Type-C DP support for USBDP PHY and DP
> >> driver. The USBDP PHY and DP will perceive the changes in cable status
> >> based on the USB PD and Type-C state machines provided by TCPM. Before
> >> this, the USBDP PHY and DP controller of RK3399 sensed cable state
> >> changes through extcon, and devices such as the RK3399 Gru-Chromebook
> >> rely on them. This series should not break them.
> >
> > What's the status with this series?
> > Are these inteded to go via the DRM tree?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
>
> Thank you very much for your continued attention to this series.
> The maintainers seem quite busy... Despite there being no further review
> comments, this series have yet to be merged into the DRM tree.
>
> And some of my other patches are in the same situation.
> Do you happen to know what the next steps should be? Thank you.
For this series, I would think it'd be best to split it a bit.
- Make patches 1, 2, 5-7 its own series
* patch 5 _should_ be included here, needs an Ack from the phy-maintainer
to go through the drm-tree. It does look independent from the other
phy changes (code changes themself), but needs the function from patch 2.
- Make patches 3+4 its own series, so that phy maintainers notice
The code-changes themself seem independent of the rest
* Reference the drm-series and explicity note that the phy-patch in it
needs an Ack from the phy maintainer to through the drm-tree
Hopefully helps to get that
* patch 1 has a Reviewed-by from the type-c side, but needs someone
knowing drm-bridge internals to agree
- Makes patches 8+9 its own series, reference both series from above
as dependencies.
That would be my take here, to have the right maintainers notice they
should do something.
Heiko
