linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: Update BOE and INX initial code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=W=9Ux4ym4GsFME2L9Qjis-pJckOinRXaese4aO4YCq2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 Nov 2021 14:31:42 -0800
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>
To:     yangcong <yangcong5@...qin.corp-partner.google.com>
Cc:     thierry.reding@...il.com, sam@...nborg.org, airlied@...ux.ie,
        daniel@...ll.ch, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: Update BOE and INX initial code

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:52 PM yangcong
<yangcong5@...qin.corp-partner.google.com> wrote:
>
> At present, we have enough panel to confirm the effect,
> update the initial code to achieve the best effect.
> such as gamma, Gtp timing. They are all minor modifications
> and doesn't affect the lighting of the panel.
>
> a)Boe panel Optimized touch horizontal grain.
> b)Inx panel Optimized GOP timming and gamma.

s/timming/timing


> Signed-off-by: yangcong <yangcong5@...qin.corp-partner.google.com>
> ---
>  .../gpu/drm/panel/panel-boe-tv101wum-nl6.c    | 108 ++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

Please resend and include the panel model in "${SUBJECT}". Right now
your subject makes it sound as if this affects _all_ BOE and INX
panels but it only affects two particular ones.


> @@ -111,18 +111,16 @@ static const struct panel_init_cmd boe_tv110c9m_init_cmd[] = {
>         _INIT_DCS_CMD(0xB0, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x1B, 0x00, 0x45, 0x00, 0x65, 0x00, 0x81, 0x00, 0x99, 0x00, 0xAE, 0x00, 0xC1),
>         _INIT_DCS_CMD(0xB1, 0x00, 0xD2, 0x01, 0x0B, 0x01, 0x34, 0x01, 0x76, 0x01, 0xA3, 0x01, 0xEF, 0x02, 0x27, 0x02, 0x29),
>         _INIT_DCS_CMD(0xB2, 0x02, 0x5F, 0x02, 0x9E, 0x02, 0xC9, 0x03, 0x00, 0x03, 0x26, 0x03, 0x53, 0x03, 0x63, 0x03, 0x73),
> -       _INIT_DCS_CMD(0xB3, 0x03, 0x86, 0x03, 0x9A, 0x03, 0xAF, 0x03, 0xDF, 0x03, 0xF5, 0x03, 0xF7),
> -
> +       _INIT_DCS_CMD(0xB3, 0x03, 0x86, 0x03, 0x9A, 0x03, 0xA7, 0x03, 0xCF, 0x03, 0xDE, 0x03, 0xE0),

You would know better than I would, but it seems like you've randomly
added / removed some blank lines in this patch. Since these are
totally opaque to me (which I hate) I don't know which is better or
worse, but it seems rather arbitrary to be messing with the spacing.


> @@ -428,10 +452,10 @@ static const struct panel_init_cmd inx_init_cmd[] = {

I should have noticed before, but the name "inx_init_cmd" is way too
generic. Can you also include a patch to rename this to
"inx_hj110iz_init_cmd" ?


Other than nits then I guess this is fine. I'll probably wait about a
week from whenever you send the next version and then plan to land it
in drm-misc-next barring any other feedback.

-Doug