linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Add HPD for DisplayPort connector type

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=V0BL0Mi2i2JR=bNVyBVQ8QA9+j+n6is0NTp8GF=X2yCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 08:30:52 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Jayesh Choudhary <j-choudhary@...com>
Cc: andrzej.hajda@...el.com, neil.armstrong@...aro.org, rfoss@...nel.org, 
	Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, 
	tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com, max.krummenacher@...adex.com, 
	ernestvanhoecke@...il.com, jonas@...boo.se, jernej.skrabec@...il.com, 
	maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, 
	airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch, kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, max.oss.09@...il.com, devarsht@...com, 
	geert@...ux-m68k.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Add HPD for DisplayPort
 connector type

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 9:24 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 2:32 AM Jayesh Choudhary <j-choudhary@...com> wrote:
> >
> > @@ -1220,6 +1231,27 @@ static void ti_sn65dsi86_debugfs_init(struct drm_bridge *bridge, struct dentry *
> >         debugfs_create_file("status", 0600, debugfs, pdata, &status_fops);
> >  }
> >
> > +static void ti_sn_bridge_hpd_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> > +{
> > +       struct ti_sn65dsi86 *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn65dsi86(bridge);
> > +
> > +       /*
> > +        * Device needs to be powered on before reading the HPD state
> > +        * for reliable hpd detection in ti_sn_bridge_detect() due to
> > +        * the high debounce time.
> > +        */
> > +
> > +       pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void ti_sn_bridge_hpd_disable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
> > +{
> > +       struct ti_sn65dsi86 *pdata = bridge_to_ti_sn65dsi86(bridge);
> > +
> > +       pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(pdata->dev);
> > +       pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(pdata->dev);
>
> nit: you don't need the pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() here, do you? Just
> call pm_runtime_put_autosuspend().
>
> Aside from the nit, this looks reasonable to me now.
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>

What's the plan here? I can just remove the
`pm_runtime_mark_last_busy()` and land it if people are on board with
that (and if it works fine for Jayesh). If Jayesh wants to post a v6
to make it more legit, I can land that. I probably won't land anything
myself past Wednesday (California time) since I'm about to go offline
for 2 weeks and wouldn't want to land and bolt.

-Doug