linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: drop unused drm

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: <adee247c-933b-418c-959d-665b1df11874@microchip.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 10:46:26 +0000
From: <Dharma.B@...rochip.com>
To: <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
CC: <Manikandan.M@...rochip.com>, <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
	<neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, <rfoss@...nel.org>, <jonas@...boo.se>,
	<jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
	<mripard@...nel.org>, <tzimmermann@...e.de>, <airlied@...il.com>,
	<simona@...ll.ch>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] drm/bridge: microchip-lvds: drop unused drm_panel

On 24/06/25 4:12 pm, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 02:54:14PM +0530, Dharma Balasubiramani wrote:
>> Drop the drm_panel field of the mchp_lvds struct as it is unused.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@...rochip.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c | 7 -------
>>   1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> index 9f4ff82bc6b4..42751124b868 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/microchip-lvds.c
>> @@ -23,7 +23,6 @@
>>   #include <drm/drm_atomic_helper.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_bridge.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_of.h>
>> -#include <drm/drm_panel.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_print.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_simple_kms_helper.h>
>> @@ -56,7 +55,6 @@ struct mchp_lvds {
>>        struct device *dev;
>>        void __iomem *regs;
>>        struct clk *pclk;
>> -     struct drm_panel *panel;
>>        struct drm_bridge bridge;
>>        struct drm_bridge *panel_bridge;
>>   };
>> @@ -179,13 +177,8 @@ static int mchp_lvds_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>                        "can't find port point, please init lvds panel port!\n");
>>                return -ENODEV;
>>        }
> 
> The above code seems unneeded now, I think you can drop it too.

Yes, I considered removing it as well. However, I was wondering if it 
might still be valuable to return early when the endpoint isn't found, 
to clearly indicate that the panel port is missing.

> 
>> -
>> -     lvds->panel = of_drm_find_panel(port);
>>        of_node_put(port);
>>
>> -     if (IS_ERR(lvds->panel))
>> -             return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>> -
>>        lvds->panel_bridge = devm_drm_of_get_bridge(dev, dev->of_node, 1, 0);
>>
>>        if (IS_ERR(lvds->panel_bridge))
> 
> --
> Regards,
> 
> Laurent Pinchart


-- 
With Best Regards,
Dharma B.