On 01/10/2019 23:08, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Many drivers print an info message at probe time when everything goes
fine, to inform about the device that has been succesfully probed. Do
you think this is overkill and a dev_dbg() would be better ?
Ah, I didn't realize this is a "probed"
Hi Tomi,
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:15:20PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 07/07/2019 21:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far
> > been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in
> > duplicate code in several
Hi Laurent,
On 07/07/2019 21:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far
been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in
duplicate code in several bridge drivers, with slightly different (and
thus confusing) logics.
In
Hi Sam,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:28:57AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 09:18:47PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far
> > been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in
> > duplicate
Hi Laurent.
Two small details, see below.
Sam
On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 09:18:47PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far
> been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in
> duplicate code in several
Display connectors are modelled in DT as a device node, but have so far
been handled manually in several bridge drivers. This resulted in
duplicate code in several bridge drivers, with slightly different (and
thus confusing) logics.
In order to fix this, implement a bridge driver for display
