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: <9f7fe1a6-77bd-4dba-9d83-2a9d0625baec@microchip.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 10:53:07 +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 4:20 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 10:46:26AM +0000, Dharma.B@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 24/06/25 4:12 pm, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>> 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.
> 
> That error is covered by the devm_drm_of_get_bridge() call below, so I
> think you can drop the code above.

Sure, I will drop the device node "port" as well.

> 
>>>> -
>>>> -     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.