Re: [RFC][PATCH] drm: kirin: Fix dsi probe/attach logic

From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@siol.net>,
	Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Xinliang Liu <z.liuxinliang@hisilicon.com>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>,
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	Rongrong Zou <zourongrong@gmail.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@thinci.com>,
	Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] drm: kirin: Fix dsi probe/attach logic
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 19:38:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLVP=x9+p9scGyfgFUMN2di+ngOz9-fWW=A1YCM4aN7JRA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9d31af23-8a65-d8e8-b73d-b2eb815fcd6f@samsung.com>

On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 3:26 AM Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com> wrote:
> On 03.09.2019 18:18, John Stultz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 6:22 AM Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com> wrote:
> >> On 30.08.2019 19:00, Rob Clark wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:52 PM Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>> Of course it seems you have different opinion what is the right thing in
> >>>> this case, so if you convince us that your approach is better one can
> >>>> revert the patch.
> >>> I guess my strongest / most immediate opinion is to not break other
> >>> existing adv75xx bridge users.
> >>
> >> It is pity that breakage happened, and next time we should be more
> >> strict about testing other platforms, before patch acceptance.
> >>
> >> But reverting it now will break also platform which depend on it.
> > I'm really of no opinion of which approach is better here, but I will
> > say that when a patch breaks previously working boards, that's a
> > regression and justifying that some other board is now enabled that
> > would be broken by the revert (of a patch that is not yet upstream)
> > isn't really a strong argument.
> >
> > I'm happy to work with folks to try to fixup the kirin driver if this
> > patch really is the right approach, but we need someone to do the same
> > for the db410c, and I don't think its fair to just dump that work onto
> > folks under the threat of the board breaking.
>
>
> These drivers should be fixed anyway - assumption that
> drm_bridge/drm_panel will be registered before the bus it is attached to
> is just incorrect.
>
> So instead of reverting, fixing and then re-applying the patch I have
> gently proposed shorter path. If you prefer long path we can try to go
> this way.
>
> Matt, is the pure revert OK for you or is it possible to prepare some
> workaround allowing cooperation with both approaches?

Rob/Andrzej: What's the call here?

Should I resubmit the kirin fix for the adv7511 regression here?
Or do we revert the adv7511 patch? I believe db410c still needs a fix.

I'd just like to keep the HiKey board from breaking, so let me know so
I can get the fix submitted if needed.

thanks
-john