linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: novatek-nt36523: transition to mipi

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: <0d473dc1-cbbe-4a1e-933a-938438db24f5@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 23:08:18 +0530
From: Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@...il.com>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, neil.armstrong@...aro.org
Cc: maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org,
 tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch,
 lujianhua000@...il.com, quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Anusha Srivatsa <asrivats@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/panel: novatek-nt36523: transition to mipi_dsi
 wrapped functions



On 3/6/25 10:58 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 6:05 AM <neil.armstrong@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/03/2025 14:43, Tejas Vipin wrote:
>>> Changes the novatek-nt36523 panel to use multi style functions for
>>> improved error handling.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tejas Vipin <tejasvipin76@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-novatek-nt36523.c | 1683 ++++++++---------
>>>   1 file changed, 823 insertions(+), 860 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-novatek-nt36523.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-novatek-nt36523.c
>>> index 04f1d2676c78..922a225f6258 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-novatek-nt36523.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-novatek-nt36523.c
>>> @@ -23,10 +23,12 @@
>>>
>>>   #define DSI_NUM_MIN 1
>>>
>>> -#define mipi_dsi_dual_dcs_write_seq(dsi0, dsi1, cmd, seq...)        \
>>> -             do {                                                 \
>>> -                     mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq(dsi0, cmd, seq);      \
>>> -                     mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq(dsi1, cmd, seq);      \
>>> +#define mipi_dsi_dual_dcs_write_seq_multi(dsi_ctx0, dsi_ctx1, cmd, seq...)      \
>>> +             do {                                                            \
>>> +                     mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq_multi(&dsi_ctx0, cmd, seq);      \
>>> +                     dsi_ctx1.accum_err = dsi_ctx0.accum_err;                \
>>> +                     mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq_multi(&dsi_ctx1, cmd, seq);      \
>>> +                     dsi_ctx0.accum_err = dsi_ctx1.accum_err;                \
>>
>> Just thinking out loud, but can't we do :
>>
>> struct mipi_dsi_multi_context dsi_ctx = { .dsi = NULL };
>>
>> #define mipi_dsi_dual_dcs_write_seq_multi(dsi_ctx, dsi0, dsi1, cmd, seq...)      \
>>                 do {
>>                         dsi_ctx.dsi = dsi0;                                     \
>>                         mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq_multi(&dsi_ctx, cmd, seq);       \
>>                         dsi_ctx.dsi = dsi1;                                     \
>>                         mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq_multi(&dsi_ctx, cmd, seq);       \
>>
>> ?
>>
>> So we have a single accum_err.
> 
> Even though the code you used was what I suggested in IRC, I like
> Neil's suggestion better here. What do you think?

I like Dmitry's suggestion [1]. If we went ahead with this we'd also
only need to equate the accum_err for the few msleep calls. Since it
does change the behavior, I'd like to hear another opinion on it before
I go ahead with it.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/p2esqngynwfrshz5rqfnmx6qgwf4dclpkb3mphwg2vavx2jbcg@clqoy5tjh7bb/

> 
> Other than that, it looks good to me.
> 
> -Doug

-- 
Tejas Vipin