Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] commit message: code and commit message mismatch --
commit e12c6082d93fb0f1838677a94386e1a971817862 Author: Liu Ying <[email protected]> drm/bridge: fsl-ldb: Get the next non-panel bridge This commit refactors the fsl-ldb driver to support getting either a panel bridge or a non-panel bridge as the next bridge in the chain. > The next bridge in bridge chain could be a panel bridge or a non-panel > bridge. Use devm_drm_of_get_bridge() to replace the combination > function calls of of_drm_find_panel() and devm_drm_panel_bridge_add() > to get either a panel bridge or a non-panel bridge, instead of getting > a panel bridge only. [Severity: Medium] Is this description accurate for the changes implemented in this patch? The commit message explicitly claims that devm_drm_of_get_bridge() was used to replace of_drm_find_panel() and devm_drm_panel_bridge_add(). However, looking at the diff below, the actual code replaces of_drm_find_and_get_bridge() with of_drm_get_bridge_by_endpoint() in fsl_ldb_probe(). Neither devm_drm_of_get_bridge() nor the combination of of_drm_find_panel() and devm_drm_panel_bridge_add() are present in the previous code or the new diff. Could the commit message be updated to accurately reflect the actual API changes being made? > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/fsl-ldb.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/fsl-ldb.c > index 7ec84c81cd786..52ae7f5b63c7c 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/fsl-ldb.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/fsl-ldb.c [ ... ] > @@ -339,10 +336,14 @@ static int fsl_ldb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (of_property_present(dev->of_node, > "nxp,enable-termination-resistor")) > fsl_ldb->use_termination_resistor = true; > > - fsl_ldb->bridge.next_bridge = of_drm_find_and_get_bridge(panel_node); > - of_node_put(panel_node); > - if (!fsl_ldb->bridge.next_bridge) > - return -ENODEV; > + next_bridge = of_drm_get_bridge_by_endpoint(dev->of_node, > + fsl_ldb->ch0_enabled ? 1 : > 2, > + 0); > + if (IS_ERR(next_bridge)) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(next_bridge), > + "failed to get next bridge\n"); > + > + fsl_ldb->bridge.next_bridge = next_bridge; -- Sashiko AI review ยท https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=2
