From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: "dbasehore ." <dbasehore@chromium.org>
Cc: "Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Thierry Reding" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>,
"Sean Paul" <sean@poorly.run>,
"Joonas Lahtinen" <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"CK Hu" <ck.hu@mediatek.com>,
"Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
"Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
"Intel Graphics" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/connector: Split out orientation quirk detection
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:33:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fe774952-6fd5-b4ec-56c9-32fd30546313@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGAzgsoxpsft-vmVOuKSAbLJqR-EZvcceLpMeWkz6ikJEKGJHg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On 12-06-19 02:16, dbasehore . wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 1:54 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 11-06-19 10:08, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Derek Basehore <dbasehore@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>> This removes the orientation quirk detection from the code to add
>>>> an orientation property to a panel. This is used only for legacy x86
>>>> systems, yet we'd like to start using this on devicetree systems where
>>>> quirk detection like this is not needed.
>>>
>>> Not needed, but no harm done either, right?
>>>
>>> I guess I'll defer judgement on this to Hans and Ville (Cc'd).
>>
>> Hmm, I'm not big fan of this change. It adds code duplication and as
>> other models with the same issue using a different driver or panel-type
>> show up we will get more code duplication.
>>
>> Also I'm not convinced that devicetree based platforms will not need
>> this. The whole devicetree as an ABI thing, which means that all
>> devicetree bindings need to be set in stone before things are merged
>> into the mainline, is done solely so that we can get vendors to ship
>> hardware with the dtb files included in the firmware.
>
> We've posted fixes to the devicetree well after the initial merge into
> mainline before, so I don't see what you mean about the bindings being
> set in stone.
That was just me repeating the official party line about devicetree.
> I also don't really see the point. The devicetree is in
> the kernel. If there's some setting in the devicetree that we want to
> change, it's effectively the same to make the change in the devicetree
> versus some quirk setting. The only difference seems to be that making
> the change in the devicetree is cleaner.
I agree with you that devicetree in practice is easy to update after
shipping. But at least whenever I tried to get new bindings reviewed
I was always told that I was not allowed to count on that.
>> I'm 100% sure that there is e.g. ARM hardware out there which uses
>> non upright mounted LCD panels (I used to have a few Allwinner
>> tablets which did this). And given my experience with the quality
>> of firmware bundled tables like ACPI tables I'm quite sure that
>> if we ever move to firmware included dtb files that we will need
>> quirks for those too.
>
> Is there a timeline to start using firmware bundled tables?
Nope, as I said "if we ever move to ...".
> Since the
> quirk code only uses DMI, it will need to be changed anyways for
> firmware bundled devicetree files anyways.
>
> We could consolidate the duplicated code into another function that
> calls drm_get_panel_orientation_quirks too. The only reason it's like
> it is is because I initially only had the call to
> drm_get_panel_orientation_quirk once in the code.
Yes if you can add a new helper for the current callers, then
I'm fine with dropping the quirk handling from
drm_connector_init_panel_orientation_property()
Regards,
Hans
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-12 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-11 4:03 [PATCH v2 0/5] Panel rotation patches Derek Basehore
2019-06-11 4:03 ` [PATCH 1/5] drm/panel: Add helper for reading DT rotation Derek Basehore
2019-06-12 21:18 ` Sam Ravnborg
2019-06-15 0:43 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-15 0:44 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-12 21:20 ` Sam Ravnborg
2019-06-14 0:32 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-11 4:03 ` [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: display/panel: Expand rotation documentation Derek Basehore
2019-06-11 15:25 ` Rob Herring
2019-06-11 22:01 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-13 12:51 ` Rob Herring
2019-06-13 21:00 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-11 4:03 ` [PATCH 3/5] drm/panel: Add attach/detach callbacks Derek Basehore
2019-06-11 8:57 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-06-12 0:25 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-21 1:57 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-21 9:19 ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-22 1:54 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-11 4:03 ` [PATCH 4/5] drm/connector: Split out orientation quirk detection Derek Basehore
2019-06-11 8:08 ` Jani Nikula
2019-06-11 8:54 ` Hans de Goede
2019-06-12 0:16 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-12 12:33 ` Hans de Goede [this message]
2019-06-14 0:36 ` dbasehore .
2019-06-11 4:03 ` [PATCH 5/5] drm/mtk: add panel orientation property Derek Basehore
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-06-11 0:22 [PATCH 0/5] Panel rotation patches Derek Basehore
2019-06-11 0:22 ` [PATCH 4/5] drm/connector: Split out orientation quirk detection Derek Basehore
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fe774952-6fd5-b4ec-56c9-32fd30546313@redhat.com \
--to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=ck.hu@mediatek.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dbasehore@chromium.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=maxime.ripard@bootlin.com \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=sean@poorly.run \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).